Document EFTA00025174 is an email chain regarding a request for an adjournment of Ghislaine Maxwell's trial in April 2021.
The email discusses a request by Ghislaine Maxwell's counsel for a 120 or 180-day adjournment of her trial, citing the need to redact other clients' names and case numbers from the motion due to Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6, which protects client confidentiality. The email chain includes communications between Laura Menninger, Nicole Simmons, and others at Haddon, Nlorgan & Foreman, Maxwell's legal team. The trial was related to charges against Maxwell for sex trafficking.

Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story
Julie K. Brown
Investigative journalism that broke the Epstein case open

Filthy Rich: The Jeffrey Epstein Story
James Patterson
Bestselling account of Epstein's crimes and network

Relentless Pursuit: My Fight for the Victims of Jeffrey Epstein
Bradley J. Edwards
Victims' attorney's firsthand account
From: ' To: " a liSAtai IMIM>, " (USANYS)" Cc: ' " < >, ' Subject: FW: US v. Maxwell - [Request for 120 or 180-day Adjournment of Trial] Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:14:06 +0000 Attachments: 2021.04.22_Defts_Letter_for_Adjoumment.pdf (USANYS)" FYI. Our response is due at S today. From: Laura Menninger Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 11:22 AM To: Cc: (USANYS) C ce. y >; Nicole Simmons >; ;Jeff Pagliuca 'Bobbi Sternheim Subject: US v. Maxwell - [Request for 120 or 180-day Adjournment of Trial] Judge Nathan - Pursuant to this Court's Order of April 20, 2021 (Dkt. 221), attached please find counsel's Letter Motion for an Adjournment of the trial. Counsel for Ms. Maxwell request redaction of their other clients' names and case numbers from this Letter Motion pursuant to Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6 which prohibits lawyers from revealing confidential information related to a client even where that information is publicly available. See In Re. Anonymous, 654 N.E. 2.d. 1128 (Ind. 1995) (lawyer violated Rule 1.6 by disclosing information relating to representation of client, even though information "was readily available from public sources and not confidential in nature"); In re Bryan, 61 P.3d 641 (Kan. 2003) (lawyer violated Rule 1.6 by disclosing, in court documents, existence of defamation suit against former client); State ex rel. Okla. Bor Ass'n v. McGee, 48 P.3d 787, 791 (Okla. 2002) (a lawyer's duty of confidentiality attaches "to all information relating to the representation, whatever its source"). Upon direction of the Court, counsel will file either the redacted or unredacted version of this letter on the public docket. Best regards, Laura Menninger Laura A. Nlenninger I Partner Haddon, Nlorgan & Foreman. EFTA00025174


