Epstein Secrets

NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. BRIEF FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT JAY P. LE•FKOWITZ SANDRA LYNN MUSUMECI KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 Attorneys for Defendant-Appellant REPRODUCED ON RECYCLED PAPER EFTA00792343 TABLE OF CONTENTS P

9 (1998) 34, 35 Fresh Del Monte Produce N.V. v. Eastbrook Caribe, 40 A.D.3d 415 (1st Dep't 2007) 43 Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) 48 Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) 32 New York State Bd. of Sex Exam'rs u. Ransom, 249 A.D.2d 891 (4th Dep't 1998) 18 People v. Arotin, 19 A.D.3

ter from Jay P. Lefkowitz to Hon. Ruth Pickholz Requesting a Continuance of the Hearing. dated September 9, 2010 09/0T/2010 09:55 FAX rihon2,,no2 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP ANO AffittATED PAATtaltgilaS Sal Lexengten Avenue Nov York. New York 10O22 Jay P. LeRoy/It. P.C. F acsnole www.larklancl.ccm September 7, 2010

9 (1998) 34, 35 Fresh Del Monte Produce N.V. v. Eastbrook Caribe, 40 A.D.3d 415 (1st Dep't 2007) 43 Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) 48 Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) 32 New York State Bd. of Sex Exam'rs v. Ransom, 249 A.D.2d 891 (4th Dep't 1998) 18 People v: Arotin, 19 A.D.3

Letter from Jay P. Lefkowitz to Hon. Ruth Pickholz Requesting a Continuance of the Hearing, dated September 9, 2010 09/07/2010 09:55 FAX 0 2:00 2 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP NIO arnuarrn PAItTNIRSHIPS 601 Lexington Avenue Now York. NkY/ Yolk 10022 Jay P LelkowItz,. To Call WIWI Dimly: Facsinne awn.. kiridandccm BY

e process safeguards). Courts evaluating that liberty interest under the procedural due process analysis articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) (balancing the private interest affected by state action, the risk of erroneous deprivation of that interest, and