Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00206714DOJ Data Set 9Other

From: "Lee, Dexter (USAFLS)"

From: "Lee, Dexter (USAFLS)" To: Paul Cassell <1 Subject: RE: proposed schedule to resolve the case Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 19:47:08 +0000 Importance: Normal Judge Cassell, The government will review your statement of facts and we will agree to a factual assertion if we believe it is correct. Insofar as your proposal to resolve the case, if there are disputed facts, the government does not agree to an evidentiary hearing on the facts disputed by the government. This case was filed on July 7, 2008, as an emergency. The government filed its response two days' later, on July 9, and an emergency hearing was held on July 11, 2008. Since that time, plaintiffs have not proceeded apace to pursue their claims. No complaint has been filed, which is the normal mechanism for commencing a civil action. Consequently, the government has not filed an answer. I believe the major point of contention between the parties is whether the U.S. Attorney's Office was obligated under 18 3371(a)(5

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00206714
Pages
2
Persons
4
Integrity

Summary

From: "Lee, Dexter (USAFLS)" To: Paul Cassell <1 Subject: RE: proposed schedule to resolve the case Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 19:47:08 +0000 Importance: Normal Judge Cassell, The government will review your statement of facts and we will agree to a factual assertion if we believe it is correct. Insofar as your proposal to resolve the case, if there are disputed facts, the government does not agree to an evidentiary hearing on the facts disputed by the government. This case was filed on July 7, 2008, as an emergency. The government filed its response two days' later, on July 9, and an emergency hearing was held on July 11, 2008. Since that time, plaintiffs have not proceeded apace to pursue their claims. No complaint has been filed, which is the normal mechanism for commencing a civil action. Consequently, the government has not filed an answer. I believe the major point of contention between the parties is whether the U.S. Attorney's Office was obligated under 18 3371(a)(5

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: "Lee, Dexter (USAFLS)" To: Paul Cassell <1 Subject: RE: proposed schedule to resolve the case Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 19:47:08 +0000 Importance: Normal Judge Cassell, The government will review your statement of facts and we will agree to a factual assertion if we believe it is correct. Insofar as your proposal to resolve the case, if there are disputed facts, the government does not agree to an evidentiary hearing on the facts disputed by the government. This case was filed on July 7, 2008, as an emergency. The government filed its response two days' later, on July 9, and an emergency hearing was held on July 11, 2008. Since that time, plaintiffs have not proceeded apace to pursue their claims. No complaint has been filed, which is the normal mechanism for commencing a civil action. Consequently, the government has not filed an answer. I believe the major point of contention between the parties is whether the U.S. Attorney's Office was obligated under 18 3371(a)(5) to consult with plaintiffs before entering into the non-prosecution agreement. Since there was no pending "case" in the district court, we believe the U.S. Attorney's had no obligation to consult with plaintiffs. The government will be filing a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) on the claim under 18 =. 3771(a)(5). We will also be seeking dismissal on the grounds of failure to prosecute. If plaintiffs believe the agreed upon facts constitute a basis for seeking summary judgment, and files a motion seeking summary judgment, the government will respond to the plaintiffs' motion. However, we will not agree to an evidentiary hearing on the disputed facts. As to the status of any pending investigation of Epstein, the DOJ's policy is not to comment on whether an investigation exists, or the progress of an investigation. I can be reached at if you wish to discuss this further. Thanks. Dexter From: Paul Cassell [mailto Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 5:39 PM To: Lee, Dexter (USAFLS) Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: proposed schedule to resolve the case Hi Dexter, The Court wants a status report from us regarding resolving the case. We are planning to file a motion for summary judgment/finding of violations of victims rights on Wednesday, October 27. This will include a statement of proposed facts and legal arguments. The motion also requests an evidentiary hearing in the event the U.S. Attorney's Office contests are proposed facts. We would then ask for a hearing on the appropriate remedy, if the court find a violation of rights. We would propose the following schedule, and wonder if you would concur: November 10 — U.S. Attorney's Office Response to the Motion. EFTA00206714 November 17 — Victims' Reply to Response. Evidentiary Hearing (if facts contested) — early December January 1, 2011— Court issues ruling on whether victims' rights were violated. If it enters a finding that the victims' rights were violated, we would propose that we file a brief on the appropriate remedy on January 14, you file a response on January 28, and we file a reply on February 4 — with the Court to hold a hearing and/or enter a ruling on remedy issue by the end of February. Let me know if this schedule seems agreeable to you. Paul Cassell Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 South 1400 East, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730 Voice: Fax: Email: http://www.law.utah.edu/profiles/default.asp?PersonID=S7&name=Cassell Paul CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. EFTA00206715

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

URLhttp://www.law.utah.edu/profiles/default.asp?PersonID=S7&name=Cassell

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: Re: Lack of jurisdiction in the Eleventh Circuit

Subject: Re: Lack of jurisdiction in the Eleventh Circuit Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 16:37:07 +0000 Importance: Normal It has been sent. Thanks. On Jun 28, 2013, at 12:09 PM, "Paul Cassell" <cassellp@law.utah.edu> wrote: > Could you pass along our pleading to whoever else in the Department is considering how to proceed on Epstein's interlocutory appeal? We believe our pleading makes compelling arguments that the Eleventh Circuit lacks jurisdiction, at this time, over any such appeal. Thanks! > Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 > Paul G. Cassell > Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law > S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah > 332 South 1400 East, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730 > Voice: 801-585-5202 Fax: 801-581-6897 Email: cassellp@law.utah.edu > http://www.law.utah.edu/profilesldefault.asp?PersonlD=57&name=Cassell,Paul > You can access my publications on http://ssm.corn/author=30160 > CONFIDENTIAL: This e

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' (USAFLS)" To: >, ' (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:38:15 +0000 Importance: Normal Hi I.— You can get me on the line once calls in. I will be at my desk — 41047 A. Vi&faller Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of Florida From: M, (USAFLS) Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 2:11 PM To:a (USAFLS) < Cc:a MI I. (USAFLS) Subject: Re: Motion to Compel and Si. Briefing Schedule I am out of class at 5:15 pm. What number shall I call? Sent from my iPhone c On Mar 8, 2017, at 11:56, a, (USAFLS) > wrote: Can we talk later this afternoon? Begin forwarded message: From: Paul Cassell <a> Date: March 8, 2017 at 8:51:03 AM EST To: "Brad Edwards (USAFLS)" Cc: " I. (USAFLS)" '`= > (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule Dear I'm writing to express some concerns about the Government's recent response to our most recent discovery requests and to request a stipulated bri

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subjec

Fr • < > Subjec :Deliberative t Process ec aratton rom am Justice - equest or wo ee xtension Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:59:47 +0000 Importance: Normal We have no objection, provided we get the following accommodation, which you already anticipated. We would request that your motion for extension of time give us an extension on our reply document, such that our reply would be due 10 days after the main Justice Department declaration that will be coming in two weeks. If you would include such language as well in any proposed order, saving us (and the court) drafting time, that would be very much appreciated. Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G Cassell CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message along with any/all attachments is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message

2p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing,

Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos £t Lehrman, P.L. 'Ovid Pam ftoisl pet WWW.PATITTOJUSTKE.COM 425 North Andrews Avenue • Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 4 00 "ti e 6.‘ tk i r atire CalkAllfle alvdtr aIINNEV rar ,NYTTENNINIP PITNEY 'OWES 02 !F $003 , 50 0 000i3V, wit JAN 2i 2,2!3 .a4P En M ZIP t20-12E 3330 Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafatia 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 EFTA00191396 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, 1. UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT EFTA00191397 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT MOTION TO SEAL Petitioners Jane Doc No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2, joined by movants Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4, move to file the attached pleading and supporti

71p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: Paul Cassell •ci

From: Paul Cassell •ci To: "IN (USAFLS)" ' Cc: , • (USAFLS)" USAFLS)" >, Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Judge Marra's Order Granting the Victims Motion to Compel Discovery Within 30 Days Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 00:46:56 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: ORDER-omnibus-wrapup.pdf [tried to send this earlier, but it may not have gone out] Dear We haven't seen the sealed order granting the Government's motion for stay either. (Have you?). But, in any event, Judge Marra's order on June 19, 2013 (DE 190) specifically stated that "The petitioners' motion to compel discovery from the Government [DE 130] is GRANTED. Within THIRTY (30) DAYS from the date of entry of this order, the Government shall . . . [produce various discovery]." For your convenience, I attach a copy of DE 190 ordering the Government to produce discovery within 30 days. So we are expecting to see you produce the bulk of our discovery on July 19, 2013, as specifically directed in DE 190 which granted our mo

2p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00013595

0p

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.