…s identity, failing to “include a ‘particularized’ or ‘individualized’ review” of materials to balance the public’s interest in monitoring federal courts’ exercise of their powers against “countervailing private interests,” and “failing to consider international comity.” Doe 171 Br. at…
…concerns may be help explain the Doe 1 email. These two Does cannot properly formulate their objections or non- objections until they have had a chance to review the excerpts mentioning them. For example, they don’t really know how…
…order explaining that the Court is “amenable to unsealing portions of documents mentioning non-parties rather than waiting to unseal the entirety of a given document until all non-parties have provided input” and that [t]his will hopefully allow…
…case. The Court should not allow such callous abuse of a First Amendment right, particularly as there is no merit to Dershowitz’s claim (Br. at 21) that ‘public monitoring has an important role to play here.’” Id. at 19…
…Maxwell anticipates more extensive briefing on this issue in support of Mr. Epstein’s Motion to Quash, a few facts bear mentioning here: x Ms. Maxwell was the employee of Mr. Epstein --in the 1990s -- not the other way around…
…14 great weight is given to documents that are material to particular judicial decisions and thus critical to ‘determining litigants’ substantive rights -- conduct at the heart of Article III -- and . . . public monitoring of that conduct.’” All Funds, 643 F. Supp…
…589, 597 (1978)). Monitoring judicial inaction is as important to the administration of justice and judicial accountability as monitoring judicial opinions. Allowing the public to access motions and papers that a court has failed to decide (or even consider) holds…
…was advising Ms. Giuffre about how to maximize her payments for selling her story, first raised the idea of mentioning Professor Dershowitz in connection with the alleged abuse, despite the fact that there was “no proof” that he was involved…
…It is, nevertheless, important to the public’ interest in monitoring federal court’s exercise of their Article II powers that the public reviews the documents.”) 6-7; (“Public access to certain parts of this transcript is outweighed by Ms. Maxwell…
… It is, 2 nevertheless, important to the public's interest in monitoring 3 federal courts' exercise of their Article 3 powers. The Court 4 keeps this somewhat less substantial public presumption in mind 5 in determining whether it is outweighed…
…3 Finally, Doe 171 asks that the Court redact portions of the November 18, 2022, hearing transcript—specifically the positions mentioning her. There is no basis, however, for sealing the transcript to a public hearing that was attended by several…
…Maxwell anticipates more extensive briefing on this issue in support of Mr. Epstein’s Motion to Quash, a few facts bear mentioning here: Ms. Maxwell was the employee of Mr. Epstein --in the 1990s -- not the other way around…
…criminal proceedings, Maxwell instead criticizes the court-ordered unsealing process generally, claiming that the unsealing process has been weaponized against her and that the media has not “served the function of ‘monitoring the federal courts.’” Maxwell Br. at 2. Maxwell…
…yeah, I remember 24 someone mentioning about being in a sexual abuse 25 trial or something, some kind of sexual abuse thing. STEVEN W OLSON 5/26/2016 39 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1325-12 Filed…
…Ms. Giuffre attempts no rejoinder to the reasoning of Mokhiber and its progeny: that modern discovery motions are core judicial processes that “may prove decisive to the outcome of particular disputes” and therefore must be open to public monitoring. Mokhiber…
…such 3 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 995 Filed 10/02/19 Page 5 of 11 evidentiary and discovery matters can cause substantial harm. Such materials are therefore of value to those monitoring the federal courts. Thus…
…s victims. Separately, the Court shall provide to the USVI a copy of a prior order, docketed under seal, explaining why the Court-ordered disclosure to Mr. Dershowitz of materials mentioning him (See Order, dated Sept. 9, 2020 [dkt. no…
…weight afforded to the presumption of access is “governed by the role of the material at issue in the exercise of Article III judicial power and the resultant value of such information to those monitoring the federal courts.” Lugosch v…
…marks omitted). This presumption is grounded in principles of transparency and government accountability. As recognized by the Second Circuit: [P]rofessional and public monitoring is an essential feature of democratic control. Monitoring both provides judges with critical views of their…
…Maxwell anticipates more extensive briefing on this issue in support of Mr. Epstein’s Motion to Quash, a few facts bear mentioning here: x Ms. Maxwell was the employee of Mr. Epstein --in the 1990s -- not the other way around…
Comments