EFTA00029077.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: data-set-8

Extracted text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
GHISLAINE MAXWELL,
Defendant.
:
20 Cr. 330 (MN)
x
MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL
IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION UNDER THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE TO
SUPPRESS ALL EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE GOVERNMENT'S SUBPOENA
TO BOIES SCHILLER AND TO DISMISS COUNTS FIVE AND SIX
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca
Laura A. Menninger
HADDON MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C.
Mark S. Cohen
Christian R. Everdell
COHEN & GRESSER LLP
Bobbi C. Stemheim
Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim
Attorneys for Chislaine Maxwell
EFTA00029077

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
ii
TABLE OF EXHIBITS
iv
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
1
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2
A.
The Protective Order in
v. Maxwell
2
B.
Maxwell's April and July 2016 depositions
4
C.
The Settlement And Boles Schiller's Refusal To Comply With The Protective Order
6
D.
The Government's False Statements To Judge McMahon
6
E.
Judge Netburn Separately Rejects An Identical Gambit By The Government
10
ARGUMENT
11
A.
Pursuant To Its Inherent Power, This Court Should Suppress The Evidence Obtained
From Boles Schiller, And Dismiss Counts Five And Six, Which Are The Fruits Of That
Evidence
11
I.
The role of protective orders in civil litigation
11
2.
The government circumvented the protective order
12
3.
The government violated due proces •
14
4.
This court possesses the inherent authority to order suppression
15
B.
At A Minimum, This Court Should Order A Hearing At Which Maxwell May Inquire
Into The Circumstances Surrounding The Government's Misrepresentations To Judge
McMahon
16
CONCLUSION
16
Certificate of Service
18
EFTA00029078

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
Benkovitch v. Gorilla, Inc., No. 2:15-ev-7806 (WJM), 2017 WL 4005452 (D.N.J. Sept. 12, 2017)

17
Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41 (2d Ck 2019)
3, 6
Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 510 U.S. 32 (1991)
17
Chemical Bank v. Affiliated …

Open in the interactive archive →