Court Questions Seal in Jeffrey Epstein-Related Defamation Lawsuit
The panel appeared close to unsealing a lower court's summary judgment in favor of an associate of financier Jeffrey Epstein, who is accused of facilitating the sex trafficking of the plaintiff and others.
March 11, 2019 at 06:25 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
Jeffrey Epstein, middle, at 2008 hearing in West Palm Beach. Photo: Uma Sanghvi/Palm Beach Post
A federal appeals court issued a show-cause order questioning a sealed summary judgment and other hidden court papers in a defamation case flowing from human trafficking claims against former Palm Beach billionaire Jeffrey Epstein.
A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ordered parties to explain why the court shouldn't follow its own precedent and unseal the order and related documents in the lawsuit accusing a former Epstein associate of procuring underage girls for sex.
The case before U.S. Judge Robert Steele of the Southern District of New York has generated a host of appeals to the Second Circuit, including by plaintiff Virginia Giuffre.
She accused Epstein of sexually abusing her for years beginning when she was 15. Giuffre sued Ghislaine Maxwell in 2015, accusing her of libel. Maxwell had been previously connected to Epstein romantically, and Giuffre alleges she was defamed by Maxwell's public statements disputing her sexual trafficking claims.
A significant portion of the record in the underlying suit has been sealed. Among those interceding in the suit, as well as the appeal, for disclosure have been the Miami Herald, represented by Holland & Knight partner Sanford Bohrer; Alan Dershowitz, the former Harvard Law professor and former counsel to Epstein; and conservative activist Michael Cernovich.
In March 2016, Steele issued a blanket protective order in the case. According to the parties opposed to the order, it sealed dozens of motions and briefs, nearly the entire record on summary judgment and even several of the court's own opinions.
The appellate panel composed of Circuit Judges José Cabranes, Rosemary Pooler and Christopher Droney heard arguments last Wednesday while handling the consolidated appeals from the district court.
It one-page order noted the circuit's precedent “clearly establishes” a strong presumption of access to documents submitted to a court for consideration in a summary judgment motion. Replies are due May 19.
Haddon, Morgan and Foreman member Ty Gee represents Maxwell on appeal. Giuffre is represented by University of Utah law professor Paul Cassell. Neither responded to a request for comment by deadline.
Epstein's accusers claim he landed a sweetheart deal with the Miami U.S. attorney's office led by Alex Acosta, now the U.S. labor secretary, to secretly settle their allegations with a light state sentence.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra in West Palm Beach concluded federal prosecutors violated the rights of the accusers under the Crime Victims' Rights Act when they reached a clandestine nonprosecution agreement with Epstein in 2008 shielding him from charges that he ran a child sex ring from 1999 to 2007.
Read more:
Atlanta Prosecutors to Handle Epstein Victims' Rights Case
Patriots Owner Robert Kraft Hires Ex-Epstein Lawyer for Prostitution Case
Judge: Alex Acosta Broke the Law by Giving Jeffrey Epstein a Sweetheart Deal
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Special Counsel Jack Smith Prepares Final Report as Trump Opposes Its Release
4 minute read
North Carolina Courts Switch to Digital, Face Extreme Weather in 2024
'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute read
Divided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1SDNY US Attorney Damian Williams Lands at Paul Weiss
- 2Litigators of the Week: A Knockout Blow to Latest FCC Net Neutrality Rules After ‘Loper Bright’
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 4Norton Rose Sues South Africa Government Over Ethnicity Score System
- 5KMPG Wants to Provide Legal Services in the US. Now All Eyes Are on Their Big Four Peers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
