Datasets:
title: 'House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12) (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011395)'
source: 'House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12)'
sourceUrl: https://www.justice.gov/epstein
date: '2026-01-01'
category: House Oversight
eftaNumber: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011395
ocrPages: 1
ocrChars: 1411
ocrElapsed: 0
parseTier: external-legacy
engine: engine undisclosed (ep-nov-12.greg.technology mirror)
externalSource: greg-ep-nov-12
externalLicense: not granted
externalCredit: ep-nov-12.greg.technology
externalUrl: https://ep-nov-12.greg.technology
92 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 H3v1giu2 statement and later press release which said, we stand by everything we said. It's directly on point. Your Honor there 3 held that such republication is not actionable. We set forth that clearly in our argument 4 of the summary judgment motion, 5 and plaintiff, in her response to summary judgment, made absolutely no reference, no response, nothing with respect to that argument. We, therefore, believe that she has conceded the point and we would ask that no evidence regarding that statement be entered in the trial. We predicted, and we were correct, that having not argued it in response to our summary judgment motion, they would try to use the opportunity of their response to this motion in limine to make substantive arguments. They should not be permitted to do so, your Honor. In any event, their arguments that they have set forth in response -- THE COURT: I'm a little lost. Perhaps totally lost. But the partial summary judgment, that's not been dealt with, or has it? MS. MENNINGER: It was not part of your Honor's ruling, no. THE COURT: Tell me the context of the summary judgment. MS. MENNINGER: Certainly, your Honor. There were a number of things that we believed plaintiff had conceded because they failed to respond to our requests in our summary SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011395