Preska Order On Dershowitz Access To Epstein Files

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1097 Filed 08/04/20 Page 1 of 6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE,
Plaintiff,
No. 19 Civ. 3377 (LAP)
-against-
ALAN DERSHOWITZ,
Defendant.
VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE,
Plaintiff,
No. 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP)
-against-
ORDER
GHISLAINE MAXWELL,
Defendant.
LORETTA A. PRESKA, Senior United States District Judge:
The Court has reviewed the parties’ update, filed in Giuffre
v. Dershowitz, No. 19 Civ. 3377, on the status of their discussions
regarding Defendant Alan Dershowitz’s request that Plaintiff
Virginia Giuffre produce to him confidential discovery materials
and sealed filings from Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 15 Civ. 7433. (See
dkt. no. 153 in 19 Civ. 3377.)
In that update, the parties agree that, if the Court permits
it, they are amenable to disclosure to Mr. Dershowitz of, among
other things, the names of all deponents, subpoena recipients, and
affiants in the Maxwell case and all documents listed on Exhibit
A to that letter, a copy of which is attached hereto. Many of the
1
documents on Exhibit A are deposition transcripts which will
undoubtedly disclose names and information about numerous of the
Does whose names have heretofore been redacted from the Maxwell
materials.
The Court is concerned that such disclosure, even under a
protective order, will (1) undermine the careful unsealing process
agreed to by the parties in Maxwell, and (2) infringe on the
privacy or other countervailing interests against disclosure of
the Does without their having notice and an opportunity to be
heard. Accordingly, by posting this order both in Giuffre v.
Maxwell, No. 15 Civ. 7433, and Giuffre v. Dershowitz, No. 19 Civ.
3377, the Court invites the Does to comment on the proposed
disclosure.
Any Doe who wishes to be heard on the disclosure proposed by
counsel in Giuffre v. Dershowitz shall inform the Court of his/her
views no later than August 18, 2020. Because those comments may
discuss information that is currently under seal in Giuffre v.
Maxwell, they will be submitted directly to the Court so that the
Court can review them in camera. Comments may be sent to the
Court’s email address at PreskaNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov.
The Court specifically requests comment from counsel for John Doe
who has appeared in Maxwell. The Court will, at the least, inform
the parties generally of the nature of any comments received.
2
Relatedly, the parties request that the Court clarify that
deposition transcripts and other documents not designated
confidential on their face (excerpts of some of which were
submitted under seal as part of the (now unsealed) summary judgment
record in Maxwell, see infra n. 1) are not subject to the Maxwell
Protective Order (dkt. no. 62 in 15 Civ. 7433) and thus may be
freely disclosed and produced to Defendant without any
restrictions on their use or disclosure. The Court agrees that
materials not designated confidential are not covered by the
Maxwell Protective Order but disagrees that there is necessarily
no restriction on their disclosure. Specifically, certain
materials may both (1) lack confidentiality designations made
pursuant to the Protective Order and (2) be filed under seal in
the Maxwell litigation. To the extent that the materials mention
nonparties to the Maxwell action and remain under seal, such
materials should not be disclosed before the nonparties mentioned
are given notice and an opportunity to comment on the disclosure.
(See supra at 2.) However, where such materials have already been
3
unsealed--either by this Court or by the Court of Appeals--they
may be freely disclosed.1
SO ORDERED.
Dated: New York, New York

August 4, 2020
__________________________________
LORETTA A. PRESKA
Senior United States District Judge
1 For example, the parties’ update specifically discusses “the

transcripts of the depositions of witnesses including James
Austrich, Tony Figueroa, Sky Roberts, Brittany Henderson, and Juan
Alessi,” which “do not bear confidential designations” and which
were unsealed by the Court of Appeals’ unsealing of the Maxwell
summary judgment record. (See dkt. no. 153 in 19 Civ. 3377 at 1.)
The Court agrees that disclosure of those and similar materials
would not run afoul of the Maxwell Protective Order.
4
Case
Case1:15-cv-07433-LAP
1:19-cv-03377-LAP Document
Document1097
153 Filed
Filed07/29/20
08/04/20 Page
Page55of
of66
APPENDIX A
1. All documents concerning Alan Dershowitz.
2. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any of Giuffre’s

family members or boyfriends, including but not limited to Sky Roberts, Anthony
Figueroa, and James Michael Austrich.
3. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any friends of

Giuffre, including Rebecca Boylan and Michael Boylan.
4. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any Epstein

employees or non-employee staff, including but not limited to Juan Alessi and David
Rodgers.
5. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by Jeffrey Epstein.
6. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by Sarah Ransome or

Maria Farmer.
7. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any of the

following individuals whom Giuffre has testified she was sexually trafficked to by
Epstein:
a. Prince Andrew
b. Jean-Luc Brunel
c. Glenn Dubin
d. Stephen Kaufmann
e. Marvin Minsky
f. George Mitchell
g. Thomas Pritzker
h. Bill Richardson
i. Leslie Wexner
j. [Redacted]
k. [Redacted]
l. [Redacted]
Case
Case1:15-cv-07433-LAP
1:19-cv-03377-LAP Document
Document1097
153 Filed
Filed07/29/20
08/04/20 Page
Page66of
of66
8. All communications between Giuffre, and/or her agents or representatives, and any
members of the media.
9. Ghislaine Maxwell’s deposition transcripts and exhibits.
10. All documents describing, or photographs, videos, or other media depicting, any of
Epstein’s properties or airplanes.
11. All flight logs from Epstein’s planes.
12. All police reports concerning Giuffre.
13. All emails exchanged between Sarah Ransome and any member of the media, including
but not limited to Maureen Callahan of the New York Post.

Preska Order On Dershowitz Access To Epstein Files

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preska Order On Dershowitz Access To Epstein Files

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preska Order On Dershowitz Access To Epstein Files

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1097 Filed 08/04/20 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

LORETTA A. PRESKA, Senior United States District Judge:

The Court has reviewed the parties’ update, filed in Giuffre

v. Dershowitz, No. 19 Civ. 3377, on the status of their discussions

regarding Defendant Alan Dershowitz’s request that Plaintiff

Virginia Giuffre produce to him confidential discovery materials

dkt. no. 153 in 19 Civ. 3377.)

In that update, the parties agree that, if the Court permits

it, they are amenable to disclosure to Mr. Dershowitz of, among

other things, the names of all deponents, subpoena recipients, and

affiants in the Maxwell case and all documents listed on Exhibit

A to that letter, a copy of which is attached hereto. Many of the

documents on Exhibit A are deposition transcripts which will

undoubtedly disclose names and information about numerous of the

The Court is concerned that such disclosure, even under a

protective order, will (1) undermine the careful unsealing process

agreed to by the parties in Maxwell, and (2) infringe on the

privacy or other countervailing interests against disclosure of

the Does without their having notice and an opportunity to be

heard. Accordingly, by posting this order both in Giuffre v.

Maxwell, No. 15 Civ. 7433, and Giuffre v. Dershowitz, No. 19 Civ.

3377, the Court invites the Does to comment on the proposed

Any Doe who wishes to be heard on the disclosure proposed by

counsel in Giuffre v. Dershowitz shall inform the Court of his/her

discuss information that is currently under seal in Giuffre v.

Maxwell, they will be submitted directly to the Court so that the

Court can review them in camera. Comments may be sent to the

Court’s email address at PreskaNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov.

the parties generally of the nature of any comments received.

Relatedly, the parties request that the Court clarify that

deposition transcripts and other documents not designated

confidential on their face (excerpts of some of which were

submitted under seal as part of the (now unsealed) summary judgment

record in Maxwell, see infra n. 1) are not subject to the Maxwell

Protective Order (dkt. no. 62 in 15 Civ. 7433) and thus may be

freely disclosed and produced to Defendant without any

restrictions on their use or disclosure. The Court agrees that

materials not designated confidential are not covered by the

Maxwell Protective Order but disagrees that there is necessarily

no restriction on their disclosure. Specifically, certain

materials may both (1) lack confidentiality designations made

pursuant to the Protective Order and (2) be filed under seal in

the Maxwell litigation. To the extent that the materials mention

nonparties to the Maxwell action and remain under seal, such

materials should not be disclosed before the nonparties mentioned

are given notice and an opportunity to comment on the disclosure.

unsealed--either by this Court or by the Court of Appeals--they

may be freely disclosed.1

Dated: New York, New York

1 For example, the parties’ update specifically discusses “the

1. All documents concerning Alan Dershowitz.

2. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any of Giuffre’s

3. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any friends of

4. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any Epstein

5. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by Jeffrey Epstein.

6. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by Sarah Ransome or

7. All documents produced, or deposition or written testimony given, by any of the

9. Ghislaine Maxwell’s deposition transcripts and exhibits.