NY Judge: Weinstein Can't Immediately Release Victims' Docs Gained in Del. Bankruptcy Case
The former Hollywood mogul was ordered to first confer with the plaintiffs in a class action brought in Manhattan federal court before any of the information could be released publicly.
December 20, 2018 at 05:33 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
U.S. District Judge Alan Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York provided the class plaintiffs pursuing a federal lawsuit against former Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein a path to keep confidential documents Weinstein is seeking in the course of bankruptcy proceedings in the U.S. bankruptcy court in Delaware.
In a two-page order issued Thursday, Hellerstein said that in the event that the Delaware court grants Weinstein's motion to be able to use communications with some of the women now accusing him of sexual assault and harassment in other proceedings, the ex-mogul could provide the plaintiffs in the New York suit “any documents relating to any plaintiff named or identified” in the initial complaint in the now-consolidated class suit.
Counsel in the New York litigation, captioned Geiss v. Weinstein Co. Holdings, would then be able to flag for proposing confidentiality any of the documents they believe should be deemed as such. The parties are then ordered to conference, and if any disagreements arise, to file motions with the court.
Hellerstein specifically directed Weinstein not to go public with documents he might retrieve from the Delaware court before “he has obtained plaintiffs' consent and authorization from this court.”
Hellerstein said the reasoning for the order had been discussed by the parties in a Wednesday conference call.
Attorneys had argued in court filings in both New York and Delaware that Weinstein was improperly looking to mine the discovery process in Delaware federal bankruptcy court for information to discredit sexual assault claims against him in Manhattan federal court.
The lead attorney for the plaintiffs, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro name attorney Elizabeth Fegan, argued in court documents that Weinstein's goal was to “impugn and attack his victims who have filed civil lawsuits while avoiding” the “oversight of an orderly discovery process.”
Fegan did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A spokesman for Weinstein declined to immediately comment.
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 All3rd Circuit Judges Zero In on Constitutional Challenges to Medicare Drug Pricing Program
Justices: Can Delaware Courts Put a Price Tag on Corporate Move to Nevada?
4 minute readSupreme Court Asked If Ellison's Plans Affected Oracle's NetSuite Acquisition
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Meet the Lawyers on Kamala Harris' Transition Team
- 5Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
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