Second Circuit
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Annabi
|
Judicial precedent |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Second Circuit inadvertently unsealed court records with Maxwell's phone number unredacted. | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal analysis | Discussion and interpretation of the application of § 3283 statute of limitations, referencing Su... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal case | The case United States v. King, where the Second Circuit upheld sealing parts of the record based... | United States | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | In *Weingarten*, the Second Circuit considered, but did not ultimately reach, the issue of whethe... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court ruling | In the Palmieri case, the Second Circuit reversed a district court's decision to grant the state ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | The Second Circuit held in *Vernon v. Cassadaga Valley Cent. School Dist.* that a new statute sho... | N/A | View |
| 2024-11-25 | Legal proceeding | The Second Circuit denied Maxwell’s petition for rehearing. | N/A | View |
| 2021-04-26 | N/A | Oral argument on bail appeal | Second Circuit Court | View |
| 2021-04-26 | Legal hearing | The Second Circuit will hear oral argument on Ms. Maxwell's bail appeal. | Second Circuit | View |
| 2020-01-01 | N/A | Second Circuit affirmed Judge Preska's ruling regarding the unsealing of deposition materials. | Second Circuit Court of App... | View |
| 2019-01-01 | N/A | Second Circuit ruling to unseal civil case records | Court | View |
| 2008-01-01 | Legal case | The legal case of United States v. Joseph, in which the Second Circuit reversed a conviction for ... | Second Circuit Court of App... | View |
| 2004-01-01 | Legal ruling | The Second Circuit held in *In re Enterprise Mortgage Acceptance Co.* that applying an extended s... | N/A | View |
| 1995-01-01 | Legal decision | The Second Circuit rejected the defendant's reasoning in the Bahna case and upheld the conviction. | N/A | View |
| 1992-10-29 | Legal event | A Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum was dated, leading to a Second Circuit ruling on the Fifth Amen... | N/A | View |
| 1987-01-01 | Legal ruling | The Second Circuit issued a writ of mandamus in 'In re U.S.', reversing a District Court's order ... | N/A | View |
| 1976-01-01 | Legal ruling | The Second Circuit court ruling in the Papa case (533 F.2d 815). | N/A | View |
EFTA00031331.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry detailing an event titled 'Accepted: Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for February 6, 2019, from 15:00 to 17:00 UTC. The record was created on January 9, 2019, and is classified as 'X-PERSONAL'. The identity of the organizer is redacted.
EFTA00031330.pdf
This document is an email notification dated January 9, 2019, indicating that an individual from the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) accepted a calendar invitation for an event titled 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit'. The identities of the sender and recipient are redacted.
EFTA00031257.pdf
This document is an email thread between Assistant United States Attorneys (SDNY) dated November 2021, preparing for the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The discussion focuses on the testimony of Paul Kane (likely an FBI agent or expert) regarding business records (specifically PCS phone records) dating back to 1997. Key strategic points include establishing the admissibility of records not created by the holding company and ensuring the protection of 'MV1' (Minor Victim 1) by not reading identifying information aloud in open court.
EFTA00030435.pdf
This document is an email notification dated February 5, 2019, indicating the acceptance of a meeting or calendar event titled 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit'. The sender and recipient identities are redacted. It appears to relate to legal proceedings involving Epstein at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
EFTA00030053.pdf
This document contains a series of internal emails from the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY) dated December 29-30, 2020, discussing case summaries ('blurbs') prepared for the incoming presidential transition team. The emails include draft summaries for two major cases: *United States v. Turkiye Halk Bankasi AS* (Halkbank), involving sanctions evasion, and *United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell*, regarding her role in facilitating Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse of minors. The document outlines the charges, case status, and trial schedules for both matters as they stood in late 2020.
EFTA00029695.pdf
An email thread from May 2021 regarding the legal proceedings of Ghislaine Maxwell. Her attorney, David Oscar Markus, notifies prosecutors of his intent to file a renewed bond motion in the Second Circuit following a ruling on conditions of confinement. The prosecutors (internal email) discuss confusion over this strategy, noting the previous ruling was about sleeping conditions, not bail.
EFTA00029469.pdf
This document is an electronic calendar record for an event titled 'Accepted: Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for March 6, 2019, from 15:00 to 17:00 UTC. The record was created on February 5, 2019, and is classified as 'X-PERSONAL'. The organizer's identity has been redacted.
EFTA00029468.pdf
This document is an email notification dated February 5, 2019, indicating the acceptance of a meeting or calendar event with the subject 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit'. The sender and recipient identities are redacted. It relates to legal proceedings involving Jeffrey Epstein at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
EFTA00029467.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry for an event titled 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for March 6, 2019. The entry is classified as personal, created in February 2019, and includes redacted fields for the organizer and attendees.
EFTA00028055.pdf
Memorandum Opinion and Order by Judge Alison J. Nathan in US v. Maxwell denying the defendant's request to broadly modify a protective order to use criminal discovery documents in civil cases. The Court found Maxwell failed to show good cause or relevance for the modification. However, the Court permitted Maxwell to share specific factual information regarding grand jury subpoenas and prior rulings by other courts ('Court-1' and 'Court-2') with relevant judicial officers under seal, as these facts were largely public record.
EFTA00027704.pdf
A letter from U.S. Attorney Damian Williams to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated October 18, 2021, regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Government requests permission to file motions *in limine* with redactions designed to protect the privacy of victims and third parties, specifically requesting the sealing of 'Section X' until the conclusion of the trial. The specific Assistant US Attorney signing the document has their name redacted.
EFTA00027661.pdf
A court order from the Southern District of New York in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated November 11, 2021. Judge Alison J. Nathan approves the parties' proposed redactions and sealing requests to protect the privacy of victims and witnesses, ordering the redacted documents to be filed by November 12, 2021.
EFTA00027413.pdf
This document is an internal USANYS email chain dated April 26, 2021, regarding oral arguments before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The email highlights a bail appeal hearing for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell scheduled for that morning before Judges Leval, Lohier, and Sullivan. The forwarding sender instructs the recipient to calendar only the 'Thursday argument,' details of which appear to be redacted in the black block at the bottom of the page.
EFTA00023413.pdf
An email dated November 14, 2021, from an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) to a colleague regarding a draft Q&A for Paul Kane (likely a witness, such as an FBI agent). The email discusses legal strategy for admitting records not created by 'PCS' but maintained by them as business records, citing the case United States v. Kuthuru. This correspondence appears to be part of the preparation for the Ghislaine Maxwell trial.
EFTA00023211.pdf
A court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated October 25, 2021. The order sets deadlines for responses and replies regarding motions in limine filed on October 18, requiring parties to file omnibus (single document) responses. It also establishes a protocol and deadline (October 29, 2021) for filing redacted briefs and a joint letter justifying those redactions.
EFTA00022958.pdf
This document is an email thread from July 30, 2020, initiated by an automated PacerPro notification regarding a 'Motion to Stay' filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (Case 20-02413). Sigrid McCawley of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP forwarded this notification to colleagues (including Peter Skinner), stating that she would respond to the motion by the following day.
EFTA00021568.pdf
This document is an email thread from February 2021 between members of the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY). The correspondence concerns the finalization of a legal filing titled 'Omnibus Opposition to Defense Motions' (likely regarding Ghislaine Maxwell, denoted by 'GM' in the filename), discussing specific redactions, typos, and the preparation of a redacted version of a July deposition. The names of the senders are redacted, but 'Will' and 'Maurene' are mentioned by name in the text.
EFTA00020952.pdf
Attorney Robert Lewis emails prosecutors in the Epstein case to inform them that New York Times reporter Mike McIntire is aggressively pursuing his client, a potential witness and former employee. Lewis notes that the reporter claims Epstein's flight logs contradict the client's deposition testimony in the Maxwell case. Lewis asserts that Epstein's flight documentation is 'incomplete, if not materially inaccurate' and mentions his client destroyed personal documents pursuant to a prior settlement agreement.
EFTA00020439.pdf
This document contains an email chain from March 2021 between defense attorney David Oscar Markus and a redacted Assistant United States Attorney regarding U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Markus introduces himself as appellate counsel for Maxwell's bail appeal and requests access to specific unredacted docket entries. The government confirms its opposition to the bail motion and notes that a protective order (ECF No. 36) is already in place.
EFTA00019534.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry record for an event titled 'Accepted: Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for February 6, 2019, from 15:00 to 17:00 UTC. The entry was created and modified on January 9, 2019. The organizer's identity is redacted. The event refers to legal proceedings involving Epstein at the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
EFTA00019533.pdf
This document is a redacted email notification dated January 9, 2019, with the subject line 'Accepted: Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit'. It appears to be an automated response or calendar acceptance related to legal proceedings involving Epstein at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The identities of the sender and recipient are obscured.
EFTA00019517.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry for an event titled 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for February 6, 2019. The event was created on January 9, 2019, and includes attendees from 'USANYS' (United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York), though specific names are redacted.
EFTA00019516.pdf
This document is an email header dated January 9, 2019, concerning 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit'. The email was sent to a recipient at the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS), but the specific identities of the sender and recipients are redacted.
EFTA00018881.pdf
This document is a letter dated November 3, 2021, from U.S. Attorney Damian Williams to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter submits the parties' joint request to charge and proposed verdict sheet, noting that a redacted version is being docketed publicly to protect third-party privacy interests, while unredacted versions are submitted to the Court. It also mentions the submission of 'Exhibit A' under seal, a document from another case relevant to a defense comment.
EFTA00018028.pdf
A court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated July 30, 2021. The order grants the Government's motion to require defense lawyer David Markus to comply with Local Criminal Rule 23.1 regarding extrajudicial statements, following an op-ed he published about the case. The judge ruled that although Markus had not formally appeared in the specific trial proceedings, his role as appellate counsel and public association with the defense made him subject to the rule.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity