Epstein Secrets

.m. 10 Before: 11 HON. ROBERT W. SWEET, 12 District Judge 13 APPEARANCES 14 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 15 Attorneys for Plaintiff BY: SIGRID S. McCAWLEY, ESQ. 16 MEREDITH L. SCHULTZ, ESQ. 17 S.J. QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH For Plaintiff 18 BY: PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQ. 19 HA

arrowness 5 of our motion here. We seek to preclude evidence involving 6 that litigation. Your Honor has already heard from my 7 colleague, Ms. McCawley, who has presented our argument for why 8 Dershowitz should not be in this case at all, and of course, if 9 we prevail on point 1, this point bec

it is not what the defendant said about the 17 plaintiff that causes her reputation to suffer but what others 18 said." 19 Plaintiff also cites Sack of Defamation. He supports 20 our position, your Honor. Here, we have a statement by 21 Buckingham Palace that was issued on the internet and widely 22 circu

rk, N.Y. March 31, 2017 10:10 a.m. HON. ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge APPEARANCES BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff BY: SIGRID S. McCAWLEY, ESQ. MEREDITH L. SCHULTZ, ESQ. S.J. QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH For Plaintiff BY: PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQ. HADDON, MORGAN AND

ize the narrowness of our motion here. We seek to preclude evidence involving that litigation. Your Honor has already heard from my colleague, Ms. McCawley, who has presented our argument for why Dershowitz should not be in this case at all, and of course, if we prevail on point 1, this point becomes i

strate that it is not what the defendant said about the plaintiff that causes her reputation to suffer but what others said." Plaintiff also cites Sack of Defamation. He supports our position, your Honor. Here, we have a statement by Buckingham Palace that was issued on the internet and widely circulated. There

rk, N.Y. March 31, 2017 LO310 a.m, Before? HON. ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge APPEARANCES BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff BY: SIGRID S. McCAWLEY, ESQ. MEREDITH L. SCHULTZ, ESQ. S.J. QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH For Plaintiff BY: PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQ. HADDON, MORGAN AND FORE

hasize the narrowness of our motion here. We seek to preclud vidence involving that litigation. Your Honor has already heard from my colleague, Ms. McCawley, who has presented our argument for why Dershowitz should not be in this case at all, and of course, if we prevail on point 1, this point becomes i

onstrate that it is not what the defendant said about the plaintiff that causes her reputation to suffer but what others said." Plaintiff also cites Sack of Defamation. He supports our position, your Honor. Here, we have a statement by Buckingham Palace that was issued on the internet and widely circulated. There