Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-6598Court UnsealedOther

Certificate of Service: 1:16-cv-00839-AJ-LM

The Certificate of Service verifies that a motion was electronically filed and served on April 18, 2016, via ECF on Sigrid S. McCawley. The motion requested the plaintiff to disclose alleged ongoing criminal investigations or, alternatively, to stay proceedings. Nicole Simmons filed the certificate.

Date
Unknown
Source
Court Unsealed
Reference
File: 1:16-cv-00839-aj-lm
Pages
1
Persons
2
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The Certificate of Service verifies that a motion was electronically filed and served on April 18, 2016, via ECF on Sigrid S. McCawley. The motion requested the plaintiff to disclose alleged ongoing criminal investigations or, alternatively, to stay proceedings. Nicole Simmons filed the certificate.

This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.

View Source Collection

Persons Referenced (2)

Browse epstein-docs ArchiveFile: 1:16-cv-00839-aj-lm
0Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 92 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 22

22p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

To: Jeff Pagliuca

From: " To: Jeff Pagliuca Cc: Sabina Mariella "Si McCawley Laura Mennin er Subject: RE: Documents Per Judge Nathan's Order Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 01:20:49 +0000 Attachments: Ex._B_2021.04.05_BSF_Reply_re_Maxwell_Rule_17(c)_Subpoena_- _Prpsd_Redact.._[Govemment_Proposed_Redactions].pdf; 2021.04.05 JEISF_Reply_re_Maxwell_Rule_17(c)_Subpoent[Govemment_Proposed_Reda ctions].pdf; 2021.04.19_LAM_Joint_Letter_with_BSF_re_redactiontin_Rule_17_pleadingsiGovemm ent_Proposed_Redactions].pdf; 2021.04.02_Defts_Resp_to_BSF_Ltr._Motn_to_Quash_Rule_17_SubiGovernment_Propos ed Redactions].pdf; Ex. A_2021.04.02_Defts_Resp_to_BSF_Ltr._Motn_to_Quash_Rule_17_Sub_- Prp;c1.._[Govemment_Proposed_Redactions].pdf Good evening, Our team has reviewed the documents and intends to propose a limited number of redactions to protect third party privacy interests. Attached please find pdfs with our proposed redactions in red boxes. Would you please let me know your respective positions regarding th

2p
Court UnsealedAug 9, 2019

Maxwell Disputes

Case 18-2868, Document 284, 08/09/2019, 2628244, Page1 of 38 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. -------------------------------------------------- ............................................. VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE, 15-cv-07433-RWS Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Statement of Contested Facts and Plaintiff’s “Undisputed Facts” Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 56.1 Laura A. M

38p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Ca_4ate.24h24/43134.01FrietibtOrtlefifitin0a0le28013,8111$2eafiabef146f 22

Ca_4ate.24h24/43134.01FrietibtOrtlefifitin0a0le28013,8111$2eafiabef146f 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. X 15-cv-07433-LAP Ms. Maxwell's Reply In Support Of Iler Objections to tnsealinu Sealed Materials Laura A. Menninger Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Ty Gee HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue EFTA00074964 Ca_QatIgt24743tictoWneDbtOrfiefiVIMOXIle?BOWERKVaffizte12401 22 Introduction This Court asked the parties to brief three issues: "(a) the weight of presumption of public access that should be afforded to an item, (b) the identification and weight of any countervailing interests supporting continued sealing/redaction of the item, and (c) whether the countervailing interests rebut the presumption of public access to the item." DE 1044 at 1. Plaintiff and the Miami Herald's responses improperly afford the highest level of presumption to discovery dispute documents, deny that any co

40p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 20-2413. Document 40. 08'20/2020. 2913550, Pagel of 74

Case 20-2413. Document 40. 08'20/2020. 2913550, Pagel of 74 20-2413 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Plaintlff-Appelke, —against— GHISLA1NE MAXWELL, Defendant-Appellant, SHARON CHURCHER, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Respondents, JULIE BROWN, MIAMI HERALD MEDIA COMPANY, ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, MICHAEL CERNOVICH, DBA CERNOVICH MEDIA Intervenors. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 15-CV-7433 (LAP) Ghislaine Maxwell's Opening Brief Ty Gee Adam Mueller HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue Den r 2 Tel. Attorneys for Defendant-Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00075477 Case 20-2413, Document 40, 08/20/2020, 2913550, Page2 of 74 Table of Contents Table of Authorities iii Introduction 1 Jurisdictional Statement 2 Issues Presented 3 Statement of the Case and the Facts 3 The defamation action and the Protective Order 3 The motion to unseal and the first appeal 6 The remand, the arrest,

74p
Court UnsealedDepositionJan 27, 2021

ghislaine maxwell compel epstein deposition

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------X VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE, Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. 15-cv-07433-RWS --------------------------------------------------X MOTION TO COMPEL TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN ............................................... Laura A. Menninger Jeffrey S. Pagliuca HADDON, MORGAN, AND FOREMAN, P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue Denver, CO 80203 303.831.7364 1 Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell submit

8p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.