…Maxwell’s rights to a fair trial by poisoning any venire and influencing witness testimony. For reasons discussed below, the Court should decline to unseal the identified Sealed Items. I. Ms. Maxwell’s July 22, 2016 deposition must remain sealed. …
…the deponent’s previous testimony. See, e.g, Vincent v. Mortman, No. 04 Civ. 491, 2006 WL 726680, at *1–2 (D. Conn. Mar. 17, 2006) (allowing plaintiff to reopen deposition when one witness' deposition contradicted defendants' deposition and medical…
…jury, unsealing the deposition material also risks compromising the integrity of witness testimony because it provides an opportunity for a witness to change his or her story to conform to the allegations made in the unsealed (and publicized) material.” Id…
…Court, it didn't have everything. 23 So after the summary judgment, your Honor will 24 remember there was other witness testimony that was presented 25 and put in the court record. There were designations for trial SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS…
…Deposition Designations and Counter-Designations Ms. Maxwell contends that trial deposition designations and counter-designations are not judicial documents: In fact, pre-trial disclosures like this contain the direct witness testimony that the parties were designating as public trial testimony…
…id. at 14-15, that deposition testimony of the witness was available in lieu of personal appearance before the July to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege. The Court, stressing that the determination must be made on a case-by-case…
…11909, ** To evidence intentional deceit, the plaintiffs present: expert witness testimony describing the characteristics of the pages as inherently deceptive; a 2010 congressional report condemning Trilegiant's post-confirmation offer and refund mitigation practices as deceptive and exploitative in 2010…
…2015)(no abuse of EFTA00585748 discretion in finding witness unavailable where attorney had represented to court that client would assert Fifth Amendment privilege). Third, plaintiff argues that Mr. Epstein "contaminated" his <…
…actual or nominal damages, Dr. Jansen must be stricken as a witness and his testimony precluded. CONCLUSION Edwards has no actual damages. That is why he wants to try a per se defamation action. However, the litigation privilege is absolute…
…after he was deposed as a fact witness in this action, but before the USVI filed its action and could obtain his testimony therein. Maxwell and Doe both argue that Epstein’s deposition is of no relevance to the USVI…
…had to review the proposed trial testimony designations for each witness to determine how he would rule on objections to the testimony that would be presented to the jury. As noted above, the trial deposition designations and counter-designations were…
…intends to offer as testimony in his, her or its case in chief. No later than 10 DAYS PRIOR TO CALENDAR CALL each opposing party shall serve his, her, or its counter (or "fairness") designations to portions of depositions designated…
…Inadmissible in the Criminal Action Risks Tainting and Prejudicing the Jury Pool The deposition testimony and witness names and information that may be revealed in this unsealing may or may not be presented (or even admissible) in the Criminal Action…
…the adverse nature of the testimony. Other factors which may enter into the trial court's exercise of discretion are: (i) the objecting party's ability to cure the prejudice or, ... [its] independent knowledge of the existence of the witness…
…Research re Grand Jury Transcript (file folder) Original proposed Ind (file folder) — includes original indictment Research re Overt Acts and Witness Testimony (green file folder) Extradition (green file folder) Corporate Liability Research (green file folder) Research re Knowledge of Age…
…of Prosecution Research Research re Grand Jury Transcript (file folder) 18 USC 2255 (file folder) Research re Grand Jury Transcript (file folder) Original proposed Ind (file folder) — includes original indictment Research re Overt Acts and Witness Testimony (green file folder) …
…depositions, each intends to offer as testimony in his, her or its case in chief. No later than 10 DAYS PRIOR TO TRIAL, each opposing party shall serve his, her, or its counter (or "fairness") designations to portions of depositions…
…intends to offer as testimony in his, her or its case in chief. No later than 10 DAYS PRIOR TO CALENDAR CALL, each opposing party shall serve his, her, or its counter (or "fairness") designations to portions of depositions designated…
…each intends to offer as testimony in his, her or its case in chief. No later than 10 DAYS PRIOR TO TRIAL each opposing party shall serve his, her, or its counter (or "fairness") designations to portions of depositions designated…
…intends to offer as testimony in his, her or its case in chief. No later than 10 DAYS PRIOR TO CALENDAR CALL, each opposing party shall serve his, her, or its counter (or "fairness") designations to portions of depositions designated…