Epstein Secrets

etained images or copies of the subject documents 11 on its computer or otherwise, the Court retains 12 jurisdiction to award sanctions in favor of Farmer, 13 Brad Edwards, or his client. That order was entered in 14 November of 2010. IS As far as any of the interested, protected 16 parties, that i

he In Re: McClean case, 2 Courts have held, and we've cited them in 2 and countless other 11th Circuit cases, and lower court 3 our motion, that Bankruptcy Courts don't have the inherent 3 cases, that's seeking criminal contempt sanctions, which 4 power to find criminal contempt. 4 I've already discussed

tein retained images or copies of the subject documents on its computer or otherwise, the Court retains jurisdiction to award sanctions in favor of Farmer, Brad Edwards, or his client. That order was entered in November of 2010. As far as any of the interested, protected parties, that is Farmer Jaff

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 29 provisions of Title 11. Courts have held, and we've cited them in our motion, that Bankruptcy Courts don't have the inherent power to find criminal contempt. Now based on the facts that I just laid out, I don't think there could ever be a basis fo

contained on the discs with Bates numbers added, and will provide a set of copied, stamped documents to the Special Master and an identical set to Farmer, who will use same to create its privilege log. Farmer agrees to prepare that portion of the privilege log relating to emails on or before December

ontempt powers only to Article III judges and that magistrates are not empowered to try criminal proceedings. As a result, the court concluded that Bankruptcy Courts do not have the inherent power to consider criminal contempt sanctions. See also In re Lickman, 288 B.R. 291, 292-93 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2003)(as Art