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 |
EFTA00017068.pdf
This document is an email chain dated July 30, 2020, in which Sigrid McCawley of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP forwards a PacerPro notification to a redacted recipient and Peter Skinner. The notification concerns a 'Motion to Stay' filed that day on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (Case 20-02413). McCawley indicates she intends to respond to the motion by the following day.
EFTA00015968.pdf
This document is an email chain from July 17, 2020, between defense counsel (Christian Everdell and Laura Menninger) and government prosecutors regarding the case of Ghislaine Maxwell (referred to as 'GM' in attachments). The defense provides a proposed Protective Order and argues for specific terms, including the removal of a 'Highly Confidential' designation and the provision of a laptop to Maxwell in the MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center) so she can review discovery materials, as in-person legal visits were not allowed at the time. The email emphasizes the defense's desire to avoid trying the case in the press and cites concerns about witness harassment.
EFTA00014661.pdf
This document contains an email exchange between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney, Laura Menninger, and US Prosecutors regarding Local Criminal Rule 23.1, which limits press statements. Menninger initially flags comments made by attorney Spencer Kuvin in 'The Sun' as a potential violation. The prosecution responds that Kuvin does not represent any trial witnesses, but counters that Maxwell's own appellate attorney, David Markus, may have violated the rule via statements to the 'NY Post'.
EFTA00014649.pdf
A digital calendar entry for November 21, 2021, serving as a reminder for a legal filing deadline related to Government Exhibit 52 (GX 52) in a court case (likely US v. Maxwell). The entry quotes a court order requiring the Government to reply to a defense argument that a specific witness ('Employee-1') cannot authenticate the exhibit because a former employee (name redacted) allegedly removed the document from Epstein's property previously.
EFTA00011050.pdf
An internal email from the US Attorney's Office (USANYS) dated April 26, 2021, announcing scheduled oral arguments before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The email highlights the bail appeal for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, scheduled for that morning at 10:00 am before Judges Leval, Lohier, and Sullivan.
EFTA00010040.pdf
A letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office to Judge Alison Nathan regarding the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The government requests clarification on two points: limiting cross-examination details about witnesses' specific acting roles (e.g., genre of movies) to prevent identification, and barring courtroom sketch artists from drawing exact likenesses of witnesses testifying under pseudonyms.
DOJ-OGR-00000248.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal filing criticizing the Second Circuit's decision regarding the scope of the Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It argues that the government's promise not to prosecute Epstein's co-conspirators, including four unnamed individuals, was unqualified and should be upheld, citing a Supreme Court precedent (Santobello v. New York).
DOJ-OGR-00000243.tif
This document is a Table of Contents for a legal brief or report. It outlines sections discussing the reasons for granting a petition, including arguments about a split among circuits regarding promises made by U.S. Attorney's offices, criticism of a Second Circuit decision, and the case's suitability for resolving a recurring legal question. The document also includes page numbers for each section.
DOJ-OGR-00000143.tif
This document discusses the legal complexities surrounding a joint trial for Maxwell, specifically focusing on the potential disqualification of her attorneys due to their involvement as potential witnesses in perjury counts and the civil action. It cites legal precedents from the Second Circuit and District of Nevada regarding attorney testimony and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, highlighting the prejudice Maxwell could face given her attorneys' long-standing representation and familiarity with the case facts.
DOJ-OGR-00000129.tif
This document is a legal excerpt discussing the application of the PROTECT Act and related statutes of limitations, particularly concerning offenses involving child sexual abuse. It references legal precedents like Weingarten, Schneider, and United States v. Dodge, emphasizing Congress's intent to broadly apply these statutes. The text also addresses Maxwell's contention regarding the applicability of the PROTECT Act to her alleged offenses based on the timing of the conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00000119.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal analysis concerning the binding nature of non-prosecution agreements (NPAs) on different U.S. Attorney's offices. It discusses whether an NPA entered into by the Southern District of Florida could bind the Southern District of New York, concluding it did not based on Second Circuit precedent. The text cites several court cases, including Santobello v. New York, United States v. Ready, United States v. Annabi, United States v. Salameh, and United States v. Gonzalez, to support its legal arguments regarding contract principles and the interpretation of plea agreements.
DOJ-OGR-00000118.tif
This document details aspects of Jeffrey Epstein's non-prosecution agreement (NPA) in Florida, where he pleaded guilty to soliciting minors for prostitution and served 18 months in jail. The NPA included a controversial provision where the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed not to charge Epstein federally or his 'potential co-conspirators,' a point criticized by the OPR as 'poor judgment.' The document also discusses Ghislaine Maxwell's contention that the NPA bars her prosecution as Epstein's co-conspirator, a claim the Court rejects based on Second Circuit precedent and the scope of the NPA.
DOJ-OGR-00000060.tif
This document excerpt discusses legal interpretations regarding a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) and the jurisdiction of United States Attorneys. It criticizes the Second Circuit's reliance on a selective reading of legal texts and highlights that the NPA was intended to resolve Epstein's state and federal criminal liability broadly, serving the interests of the United States and the State of Florida, not just a specific district.
DOJ-OGR-00000058.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal filing, discussing the interpretation of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and plea agreements. It argues that ambiguities in such agreements should be resolved against the government, citing several court cases. The document specifically contends that the NPA in question was intended to bind the Southern District of New York, contrary to a Second Circuit conclusion that suggested it only bound the Southern District of Florida.
DOJ-OGR-00000053.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal document discussing the enforceability of plea agreements made by the U.S. Attorney's Office, particularly concerning whether such agreements bind the entire government or only the specific office involved. It contrasts the Ninth Circuit's view, which generally holds agreements binding on the whole government, with the Second and Seventh Circuits' opposite presumption, which limits enforceability to the specific U.S. Attorney's office unless explicitly stated otherwise. The text references case law such as United States v. Johnston and Annabi.
DOJ-OGR-00000051.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal report discussing a circuit split regarding federal criminal law, specifically the binding nature of plea agreement promises made by United States Attorneys. It details how the Third, Fourth, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits apply 'Santobello's instruction' that such promises bind the government, citing the Third Circuit's ruling in United States v. Gebbie (2002) and the Fourth Circuit's ruling in United States v. Carter (1972) to explain that U.S. Attorneys' commitments bind the entire federal government.
DOJ-OGR-00000049.tif
This document, likely a legal petition or brief, discusses the reasons for granting a petition filed by 'Maxwell' after an en banc rehearing was denied. It focuses on a circuit split regarding the binding nature of plea agreements made by a U.S. Attorney's office in one district on other U.S. Attorney's offices. The document cites Santobello v. New York as a precedent suggesting that such promises should be binding across different prosecutors.
DOJ-OGR-00018346.jpg
This legal document, filed on August 10, 2022, is a court ruling regarding the admissibility of photographic evidence in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The Court decides to admit photos of Jeffrey Epstein's apartment and massage room to corroborate the testimony of a witness named 'Jane'. The admission of photos of the massage room is conditional upon the redaction of pictures on the wall.
DOJ-OGR-00017692.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a legal discussion between a judge and an attorney, Ms. Moe. The conversation centers on the admissibility of evidence for impeaching a witness named Jane, debating whether the issue falls under Rule 408, and emphasizing the necessity of the witness's personal knowledge. The judge also elaborates on the binding nature of Second Circuit precedent on district courts unless overturned by a higher authority.
DOJ-OGR-00017691.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a dialogue between an attorney, Ms. Moe, and the judge. They are discussing a complex legal issue regarding an amended rule and a Second Circuit decision on the admissibility of civil litigation settlements in a criminal case. The judge expresses doubt that the rule amendment overrules the binding Second Circuit precedent and asks Ms. Moe, representing the government, to research the issue.
DOJ-OGR-00015144.jpg
This legal document, page 12 of a court filing from August 11, 2025, discusses the rule of secrecy for grand jury matters as established in Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e). It outlines the specific, narrow exceptions that permit disclosure to government personnel, other grand juries, and law enforcement, or by court order for judicial proceedings and various government investigations. The document then introduces the 'Special Circumstances' Doctrine, developed by the Second Circuit, which allows for disclosure in cases of unusual historical or public interest, citing several precedent cases.
DOJ-OGR-00015141.jpg
This legal document, filed on August 11, 2025, details a motion by the Deputy Attorney General to unseal grand jury materials from the Maxwell and Epstein cases. The motion is justified by significant public interest and a directive from the President, following a July 6, 2025, DOJ/FBI memorandum on the Epstein investigation. In response, the court has requested additional information from the government to rule on the motion.
DOJ-OGR-00015138.jpg
This legal document outlines Ghislaine Maxwell's ongoing appeals process, including a denied petition at the Second Circuit and a pending petition before the Supreme Court as of July 2025, which argues her prosecution was barred by Jeffrey Epstein's prior non-prosecution agreement. The document also details a February 27, 2025, Department of Justice press release announcing the declassification and public release of files related to Epstein's crimes. The release features quotes from Attorney General Pamela Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, who both promise transparency and accountability.
DOJ-OGR-00015135.jpg
This legal document, page 3 of a filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, summarizes the evidence from Ghislaine Maxwell's trial, which concluded on December 29, 2021, with her conviction on five counts. It details testimony from four victims (Jane, Kate, Annie, Carolyn) and other evidence establishing Maxwell's instrumental role in Jeffrey Epstein's decade-long scheme to sexually abuse underage girls. The document also references post-trial motions, appeals, and the separate dismissal of perjury charges against Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00015119.jpg
This legal document argues against the unsealing of grand jury materials related to the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. The filing, made on behalf of unnamed third parties, contends that their privacy interests and the potential for irreparable harm outweigh any public interest in disclosure, citing legal precedent for grand jury secrecy. It also references a similar, recent decision in the Southern District of Florida regarding the Jeffrey Epstein investigation to support its position that the materials should remain sealed.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity