Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Ghislaine Maxwell Motion For 37 B And C Sanctions During The Virginia Roberts Lawsuit (Part 3) (10/3/26)

Transcript

Ghislaine Maxwell Motion For 37 B And C Sanctions During The Virginia Roberts Lawsuit (Part 3) (10/3/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: In this episode we're going to continue on with the
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: Glenn Maxwell Rule 37 motion and pick up where we
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: left off. Number 3. Plaintiff has been non-compliant since the
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: outset of discovery. From the initiation of discovery, plaintiff has
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: played hide the ball. Starting with the service of Rule
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: 26a disclosures, plaintiff has simply refused to turn over required
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: and necessary information In her initial Rule 26A disclosures in
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: November of 2015, plaintiff failed to provide any information on
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: the calculation of or supporting evidence for her damages claim.
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: When she supplemented her Rule 26A disclosures, she provided none
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: of the necessary information or an actual computation of damages
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: relying on other people's alleged earning potential and average damage
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: rewards in other cases with completely different claim types. see
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: Motion to Compel Rule 26A Disclosure at 5-6-DE-64. To date,
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: over six months after her Rule 26A disclosures were acquired
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: and less than 10 days left in discovery, plaintiff has
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: failed and refused to provide any supporting documentation for her
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: damages claims or an actual computation of her damages based
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: on her alleged injury as required by FedR-Civ P26A3. At
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: a minimum, Reliance on any calculation, information, or evidence that
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: has not been provided as of this filing of this
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: motion must be precluded. Plaintiffs Rule 26 failures do not
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: end with the damages calculations. It has now become clear
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: that plaintiff failed to disclose witnesses with relevant information based
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: on the subpoenas she has served in this matter. plaintiff
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: repeatedly has issued subpoenas to witnesses for depositions and document
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: production before including them on her Rule 26 disclosures to Witt,
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: Allison Chambers, Aviation Insurance, Redacted, Joe Ricari, Michael Ryder, and
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: Shopper's Paradise. How many other witnesses are there with relevant
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: information that plaintiff has hidden? Plaintiff has been equally evasive
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: in responding to written discovery. Until Ms. Maxwell was forced
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: to file a motion to compel, plaintiff failed to give
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: even the most basic relevant and fully discoverable information, including
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: the identities of plaintiff's physicians, information on her work and
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: education history, and even the identity of her counsel and
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: the matters on which they represented her. After being ordered
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: to provide this information, plaintiff continued her strategy of providing
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: made-up or false information or simply refusing to provide the
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: ordered information. First, despite being ordered to produce all documents
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: relating to alleged law enforcement inquiries other than plaintiff's own statements,
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: which would be provided for in-camera review, she simply provided
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: all documents relating to alleged law enforcement inquiries for an
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: in-camera review, attempting to re-litigate the issue instead of complying
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: with the court's order. See DE 139. Second, she and
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: her attorneys have fabricated and backdated a string of engagement
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: letters attempting to substantiate their privileged claims as fully detailed
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: in Ms. Maxwell's reply in support of motion to compel
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: non-privileged documents. C.D.E. 191. P. 9. As shown above, plaintiff
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: only selectively and belatedly turned over medical records and the
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: identity of her medical providers and only after Ms. Maxwell
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: uncovered their existence. Similarly, plaintiff was specifically asked for photographs
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: of plaintiff with certain individuals, including Prince Andrew, and production
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: of those photographs in native format. Plaintiff claimed she produced
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: documents she had but did not possess any native format pictures.
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: Meninger Declaration Example E at 26 and 27 In plaintiff's deposition,
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: she revealed that she had a box of documents that
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: included pictures, including perhaps a photograph of herself and Prince Andrew,
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: but that she did not look through the box or
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: provide any of its contents. Manager Declaration Example G at
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: 208 through 213. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff counsel produced 60 pages
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: of pictures previously withheld. Manager Declaration Example M. plaintiff still
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: has not provided the native versions of these photographs. This
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: pattern was repeated again in just the past few days
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: when plaintiff turned over additional relevant documents from plaintiff's iCloud account,
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: but only did so after Ms. Maxwell's counsel ferreted out
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: that account through detailed review of documents produced showing that
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: the account was used by plaintiff, including in her correspondence
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: with her counsel. plaintiff failed to disclose the account, the
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: identity of which was requested, discovery. Compare manager declaration, example F,
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: with 8 and 9 with manager declaration, example G, at 277.
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: Manager declaration, example N, letter, iCloud account. While Ms. Maxwell
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: has been unable to unearth some of the information plaintiff
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: has purposely withheld, there is simply no telling what else
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: she is still hiding. The sanctions imposed by Rule 37
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: for obstruction or failing to comply with discovery procedures would
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: be hollow indeed if they could be imposed only on
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: those whose efforts at concealment proved to be successful. Plaintiff
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: may not properly escape the consequences of plaintiff's own wrongful
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: conduct because the defendants were diligent and persistent enough to
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: overcome the obstacles which plaintiff placed in their path. Natolo v. Brand,
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: 96 FRD 672, SDNY 1983. 4. Plaintiff and her counsel
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: are fully aware of sanctions for noncompliance with court orders.
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: Although formal warnings often precede the imposition of serious sanctions,
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: this court has never considered warning an absolute condition precedent.
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: Davidson v. Dean, 204 FRD 251-257, SDNY 2001. plaintiff is
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: represented by no less than four law firms and has
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: seven attorneys of record in this case. Each should be
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: fully aware, without need for warning, that the failure to
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: comply with this court's orders can result in Rule 37 sanctions.
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: It is elementary fact that the expectation of legal practice
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: that an attorney who fails to abide by a court
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: rule or order may be subject to sanctions or other
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: adverse consequences. Payne, 707, F. 3D, 195, 206, 2nd Circuit, 2013,
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: also see Gervie vs. Cowan, Leibowitz and Latham, PC, number 06, SIV, 1202, LGS, HBP, 2014, WL, 715,
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: 612 at 6, SDNY, February 25, 2014. Although the offending
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: party was not expressly warned of the consequences of disobeying
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: my orders, she is an attorney and is chargeable with
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: knowing the consequences of violating a court order. b. Additional
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: Rule 37 factors for failure to comply with initial disclosure requirements.
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: The factors considered under Rule 37b and c largely overlap,
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: and the issues of willfulness and prejudice are addressed above.
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: The two additional factors considered in imposing the sanctions for
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: failure to provide required Rule 26A damages, calculations and documents,
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: the importance of the information, withheld, and possibility of continuance,
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: also warn imposition of striking the claims for physical and
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: emotional distress damages. 1. Information withheld is critically important. As
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: fully explained in the motion to compel Rule 26A disclosures,
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: To date, plaintiff still has not provided an actual computation
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: of the physical and emotional distress damages she claims. Despite
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: specific discovery requests, plaintiff failed to provide the information about
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: her most current physical and mental health treatment providers, those
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: people whom she saw after the alleged defamation. This information
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: is critical to the defense against plaintiff's damage claims. The
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: undisclosed records demonstrate that plaintiff did not seek any treatment
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: immediately following the alleged defamatory statement on January 2, 2015.
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: The first treatment she sought thereafter was on March 5, 2015,
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: was unrelated to any physical or emotional distress caused by
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: the alleged defamatory statement. Instead, she was treated at a
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: hospital for a domestic violence incident in which her husband
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: strangled and punched her. This is highly redacted. Yet Plaintiff
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: did not report this treatment or identify these healthcare providers
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: in her initial disclosures or interrogatory responses. She also purposefully
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: left this information out of her testimony relating to doctors
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: she has seen after January 2, 2015. Plaintiff is obviously
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: trying to hide this, very serious, other intervening cause of
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: her damages, and she almost got away with it. Dr.
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: Lightfoot is perhaps the most prevalent healthcare provider, yet her
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: name appears nowhere in the disclosures or in the interrogatory responses.
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: Plaintiff still has not produced a single record from Dr.
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: Lightfoot for any treatment after the alleged defamatory statement. A
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: third doctor, Dr. Donahue, may have been named, but the
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: nature and dates of the treatment he provided were never disclosed. Redacted, redacted,
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: no records have been produced, redacted. There is a clear
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: need to depose Dr. Donahue regarding this failure to mitigate damages. Yet,
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: his records have not been produced and his role in
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: plaintiff's treatment was not disclosed until after plaintiff's deposition. One
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: can only assume that Dr. Carol Hayek has relevant information.
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: She was actually included in plaintiff's second supplemental response and objections.
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: plaintiff nevertheless fails to identify the nature of Dr. Hayek's
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: treatment of her and no records have been produced, plaintiff
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: cannot be permitted to identify people with relevant information that
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: she plans on relying on and yet refused to inform
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: the defense the content of the information. The information that
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: was withheld and only produced after Ms. Maxwell's counsel discovered
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: it existed is paramount importance to the damage claims. It
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: is likely that still undisclosed evidence is equally compelling. 2. Ms.
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: Maxwell would require an extension of the discovery period. Ms.
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: Maxwell does not wish to extend the discovery deadlines in
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: this matter and has diligently worked to meet all deadlines
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: so that this case can proceed on the schedule set
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: out in the scheduling order. Ms. Maxwell obtained the deposition
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: testimony of the one treatment provider plaintiff did initially identify, Dr. Olson,
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: who has provided valuable information that disproves any physical or
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: emotional distress damages caused by the alleged defamation. Now, on
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: the eve of discovery, closing, Ms. Maxwell has learned of
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: at least five other medical treatment providers in the most
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: relevant time frame, People providing medical and mental health services
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: post the alleged defamatory statement in January of 2015. Plaintiff
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: discovery failures in hiding relevant treating physician information have prevented Ms.
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: Maxwell from obtaining what now appears to be critical information.
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: Two of these providers, Dr. Lightfoot and Donahue, are located
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: in Australia, requiring significant travel to obtain their deposition and
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: potentially requiring service of process through other means. Four other
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: treatment providers, Dr. Geiger, Dr. Haney, Donna Oliver, PA, and Dr.
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: Streeter reside in Colorado. Because they are outside of the jurisdiction,
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: they are not subject to be compelled to appear at
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: trial requiring that their depositions be taken to present their testimony. Ms.
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: Maxwell does not wish to drag this case out and
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: should not be forced to incur the time and expense
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: that would be required to obtain discovery from these hidden
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: health care providers, especially at this late stage. 2. Striking
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: claims for medical and emotional distress damages is consistent with
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: the purpose of Rule 37, commensurate with information withheld and
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: less harsh than the available dismissal sanction. Under Rule 37, Ms.
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: Maxwell could certainly request the more severe sanction of dismissal
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: of the case. The most severe sanction would be appropriate
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: in this circumstance. Dismissal is consistent with the sanctions imposed
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: by many courts in the district and throughout New York,
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: in similar situations where medical records have been withheld despite
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: a court order to produce. And those medical records are
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: central to the issue in the case. See Natolo v. Brand,
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: 96 FRD 672, SDNY 1983. Dismissing plaintiff's claim under Rule
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: 37 for providing false and evasive answers concerning material facts,
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: including medical history. Skywork v. Isaacson, No. 96 Civ, 2815
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: JFK 1999 WL 1489038 at 1 SDNY October 14th, 1999.
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: Number 96, SIV, 2815 JFK 2000 WL 145465 SDNY February 9th, 2000.
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: Dismissal of plaintiff's claims for failure to turn over medical
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: records relevant to claims and withholding court-ordered information until uncovered
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: by the defendant. Reply to Consul RNC Cases No. 127-2009-WL-130178
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: at 13, SDNY, January 8, 2009. Dismissal of Emotional Distress
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: Claims Under Rule 37 for Failure to Turn Over Relevant
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: Medical Records Despite a Court Order With Arana v. Dorsey No.
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: 13 CV 3102 ENV MDG 2015 WL 451 0273 at 5.
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: EDNY July 24, 2015 Dismissal of claims under Rule 37
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: for failure to provide court-ordered medical release relevant to claims.
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: Here Ms. Maxwell seeks the lesser sanction for striking the
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: claim or precluding evidence only on the damages that relate
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: to the withheld documents and information. The information being withheld,
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: medical and psychological providers and their records related directly to
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: the claims for physical, psychological, and emotional distress damages. The
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: sanction sought is directly related to plaintiff's violation of the
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: court's order. Given the 10 days left in discovery, Ms.
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: Maxwell cannot adequately get discovery on this newly discovered evidence.
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: In light of plaintiff's continuing and persistent discovery misconduct, the
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: punishment fits. Conclusion Wherefore, Ms. Maxwell requests that this court
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: enter in order 1. Striking plaintiff's damages claims for psychological
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: pain and suffering, mental anguish, and emotional distress, physical, psychological,
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: and psychiatric injuries, and resulting medical expenses, Rule 26a, Disclosure,
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: Paragraph C1, and past, present, and future pain and suffering,
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: mental anguish, humiliation, and emotional distress. embarrassment, loss of self-esteem,
• 15:50
  Speaker 1: loss of standing in the community, loss of dignity, and
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: invasion of privacy in her public and private life. Rule
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: 26a Disclosures, Paragraph C1. 2. For attorney fees and costs
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: incurred in filing this motion, and 3. Warning plaintiff that
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: further violation of this court order or the discovery rules
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: may result in sanction of dismissal of her claims. This
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: was dated June 20th of 2016 and it was signed
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: by Laura Menninger. Alright folks, that's going to do it
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: for this one and for this document as a whole.
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: So we'll keep it moving and we'll get the next
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: document queued up and ready to go. But until then,
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: you can find all of the information that goes with
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: this episode in the description box.