Epstein Secrets

aMbesf1laf 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -against- ALAN DERSHOWITZ, Plaintiff, Defendant. Plaintiff, -against- GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. No. 19 Civ. 3377 (LAP) No. 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP) MEMORANDUM & ORDER LORETTA A. PRESKA, Senior United States District Judge: Be

tive Order.° All of those materials and any material, including work product, derived from the Maxwell materials (other than the deposition ofl in Maxwells) shall be destroyed. Counsel shall submit an affidavit detailing the steps taken to do so. Furthermore, to the extent that it is doing so, Cooper &

materials produced in discovery that "are confidential" and that implicate "common law and statutory privacy interests" of and Maxwell Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell"). (Id. 1 3.) Under the order, materials properly marked CONFIDENTIAL "shall not be disclosed or used for any purpose except the prep

s" of and Maxwell Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell"). (Id. 1 3.) Under the order, materials properl

ourt rules that certain discovery materials from the Maxwell case are not properly in possession of Plaintiff

e modified for purposes external to the lawsuit in which it was entered" may be a dispositive factor in denying modification of a protective order. Nielsen Co. (U.S.), LLC v. Success Sys., Inc., 112 F. Supp.3d 83, 121 (S.D.N.Y. 2015); see also Jose Luis Pelaez, 312 F. Supp. 3d at 416-17. Here, there is no

bpoena. The application is granted. I. Background A. The Protective Order In September 2015, Virginia L. Giuffre commenced a civil suit against Ghislaine Maxwell, alleging that Maxwell had defamed Giuffre by stating that Giuffre was not the victim of sex crimes perpetrated by, among others, Maxwell a

e application is granted. I. Background A. The Protective Order In September 2015, Virginia L. Giuffre commenced a civil suit against Ghislaine Maxwell, alleging that Maxwell had defamed Giuffre by stating that Giuffre was not the victim of sex crimes perpetrated by, among others, Maxwell and Jeffre

broad blanket order, stipulated to by the parties, which afforded the parties the discretion to designate whatever they produced as 'confidential.' Nielsen Co. (U.S), LLC v. Success Sys., Inc., 112 F. Supp. 3d 83, 120 (S.D.N.Y. 2015). Blanket pretrial protective orders, drafted by the parties and "so ordere

has filed an application for modification of a March 18, 2016 pretrial protective order, entered by the late Hon. in a civil defamation action, v. Maxwell, No. 15-cv-7433 (S.D.N.Y.) ("the Action"), in order to permit the law firm of Boles Schiller Flexner LLP ("Boies Schiller") to comply with a grand

ith a grand jury subpoena. The application is granted. I. Background A. The Protective Order In September 2015, commenced a civil suit against Ghislaine Maxwell, alleging that Maxwell had defamed by stating that was not the victim of sex crimes perpetrated by, among others, Maxwell and Jeffrey Eps

road blanket order, stipulated to by the parties, which afforded the parties the discretion to designate whatever they produced as 'confidential.'" Nielsen Co. (U.S.), LLC v. Success Sys., Inc., 112 F. Supp. 3d 83, 120 (S.D.N.Y. 2015). Blanket pretrial protective orders, drafted by the parties and "so order