Christian R. Everdell
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Client |
64
Very Strong
|
183 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
18
Very Strong
|
25 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
83 | |
|
person
MARK S. COHEN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MARK S. COHEN
|
Business associate |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Client |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Alison Moe
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
ANDREW ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Mark S. Cohen
|
Business associate |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Cohen & Gresser LLP
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Cohen & Gresser LLP
|
Professional employment |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Bobbi C. Sternheim
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Lara Pomerantz
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Opposing counsel |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Pomerantz
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
The Honorable Alison J. Nathan
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Bobbi C. Sternheim
|
Co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
David Oscar Markus
|
Professional co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Pomerantz
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mark Stewart Cohen
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
David Oscar Markus
|
Co counsel |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court proceedings | The document states the attorney's appearance is for the purposes of an upcoming arraignment, ini... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-08-04 | Legal proceeding | A court order was issued granting the motion for attorneys Christian R. Everdell and Mark S. Cohe... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-08-01 | Legal filing | Filing of a Notice of Motion to Withdraw by Christian R. Everdell, Mark S. Cohen, and Cohen & Gre... | New York, New York | View |
| 2025-08-01 | Legal proceeding | A proposed order was filed granting the motion for attorneys Christian R. Everdell and Mark S. Co... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-08-01 | N/A | Filing of declaration supporting motion to withdraw as counsel. | New York, New York | View |
| 2022-08-22 | N/A | Sentencing Hearing in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Sentencing | Sentencing hearing for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-15 | Legal document service | Christian R. Everdell served a memorandum via ECF upon four individuals. | N/A | View |
| 2022-06-15 | Legal filing | Document 662 was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2022-06-15 | Legal filing | Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell submitted a document to the court arguing for a sentence below th... | U.S. Court (Case 1:20-cr-00... | View |
| 2022-06-15 | N/A | Filing of Sentencing Memorandum on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2022-03-11 | N/A | Filing of Reply Memorandum | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-03-11 | Court filing | Filing of "GHISLAINE MAXWELL’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL". | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-03-11 | Legal filing | Filing of 'GHISLAINE MAXWELL’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL' with the court. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-03-11 | N/A | Filing of Document 647 requesting to vacate conviction and enter judgment of acquittal. | New York, New York | View |
| 2022-03-11 | Legal filing | Filing of Document 642 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Legal filing | Document 616 was officially filed with the court in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Legal filing | Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys filed a reply in support of her motion for a new trial. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Legal filing | Document 612 was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Court associated with Case ... | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Legal filing | A motion for a new trial was filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Legal filing | Document 613-1 was filed in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2022-02-11 | N/A | Filing of legal motion seeking to vacate conviction and enter judgment of acquittal | New York, New York | View |
| 2022-02-11 | Legal filing | Filing of an Omnibus Memorandum in Support of Her Post-Trial Motions by Ghislaine Maxwell's attor... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-02-11 | Legal document service | A memorandum was served via ECF (Electronic Case Filing). | N/A | View |
| 2022-02-09 | Legal filing submission | A legal document was dated and submitted, requesting a new trial or an evidentiary hearing to exa... | N/A | View |
22-1426_Documents.pdf
This document consists of a Docketing Notice from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals dated July 8, 2022, for the appeal of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 22-1426), and a Notice of Appeal and Criminal Docket from the Southern District of New York (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed July 7, 2022. It details Maxwell's conviction and sentencing, including multi-year imprisonment terms and a $750,000 fine for charges related to conspiracy to entice minors for illegal sex acts, transport minors for sexual activity, and sex trafficking, with some counts dismissed or deemed multiplicitous.
20-3061_Documents.pdf
This document is the complete appellate record for case 20-3061, an interlocutory appeal by Ghislaine Maxwell against the United States. Maxwell appealed a District Court order denying her motion to modify a protective order, seeking permission to share confidential criminal discovery materials under seal with the judge in a related civil case (Giuffre v. Maxwell) to challenge the government's acquisition of evidence. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, ruling that the protective order decision was not a final judgment or an appealable collateral order, and denied Maxwell's motion to consolidate the criminal appeal with the civil appeal.
EFTA00038962.pdf
This document is an email forwarding a Notice of Electronic Filing from the U.S. District Court (SDNY) regarding the case USA v. Maxwell. On April 29, 2022, Judge Alison J. Nathan issued an Opinion & Order denying Ghislaine Maxwell's Rule 29 motion and confirming her conviction on Counts Three, Four, and Six, while dismissing other counts as multiplicitous. The order explicitly mentions Jeffrey Epstein as a co-conspirator in a scheme to abuse underage girls and confirms Maxwell's sentencing date for June 28, 2022.
EFTA00032465.pdf
This document contains a chain of legal correspondence between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (led by Laura Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding the logistics of reviewing evidence for her trial. The discussions focus on protocols for accessing 'highly confidential' materials, specifically 2,100 nude or partially nude electronic images seized from Jeffrey Epstein's devices, which the government deems obscene and restricts from duplication. The emails also negotiate the transport of physical evidence, including computers, cash, and bulky items like massage tables and plaster busts, from an FBI warehouse in the Bronx to the courthouse at 500 Pearl Street.
EFTA00031918.pdf
This document is a Reply Memorandum filed on March 16, 2021, by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team in support of her third motion for bail. The defense proposes a comprehensive bail package including a $28.5 million bond, asset monitoring by a retired federal judge, and renunciation of her British and French citizenships to mitigate flight risk concerns. Attached as Exhibit A is a legal opinion from French attorney William Julié arguing that if Maxwell renounces her French citizenship, she would no longer be protected from extradition by France, countering the French Ministry of Justice's position.
EFTA00031690.pdf
This document is an email chain from May 3, 2021, forwarding a 'Notice of Electronic Filing' from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York regarding the case USA v. Maxwell. The notice contains the text of an order by Judge J. Nathan granting a continuance of the trial until Fall 2021 to allow the defense time to prepare for additional charges in the S2 indictment. The order mandates that the parties meet and confer by May 10, 2021, to propose a specific trial start date.
EFTA00030934.pdf
This document is a legal letter dated December 28, 2020, from Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney, Christian Everdell, to the US Attorney's Office (SDNY). The letter formally requests a Bill of Particulars to clarify the allegations in the Superseding Indictment, specifically asking for the real names of Minor Victims 1-3, precise dates and locations of alleged grooming and sexual abuse, details regarding travel in 1996 (NM and FL/NY), and specifics concerning perjury allegations from 2016 depositions.
EFTA00030757.pdf
This document contains an email chain forwarding a Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) from the U.S. District Court (SDNY) regarding the case USA v. Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The NEF details a court order by Judge J. Nathan dated December 8, 2020, which denies Ghislaine Maxwell's request to summon Warden Heriberto Tellez to testify about her confinement conditions. However, the order mandates that the Government submit written updates every 60 days regarding Maxwell's access to legal materials and ability to communicate with counsel.
EFTA00030686.pdf
This document is a Notice of Electronic Filing from the U.S. District Court (SDNY) regarding the case USA v. Maxwell. The filing is a Court Order dated December 8, 2020, in which Judge Nathan denies Ghislaine Maxwell's request to summon Warden Heriberto Tellez to testify regarding her conditions of confinement. The order mandates that the Government provide written updates on Maxwell's conditions, specifically regarding legal access, every 60 days.
EFTA00030021.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (led by Laura Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office regarding the logistics of reviewing evidence for the case *US v. Maxwell*. The discussion focuses on the protocols for reviewing 'Highly Confidential' materials (specifically nude images and videos seized from Jeffrey Epstein's devices), the transport of physical evidence (including massage tables, plaster busts, and a stuffed dog) from the FBI Bronx warehouse to the courthouse, and the scheduling of Maxwell's transport by Marshals to 500 Pearl Street. The prosecution refuses to transport bulky items or obscene digital material freely, requiring the defense to view some items at the warehouse or on specific laptops under supervision.
EFTA00029877.pdf
This document is an affidavit filed on July 27, 2020, by Christian R. Everdell, attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell. It certifies that the defense conferred with the prosecution regarding a protective order but remains in dispute over two issues: restrictions on government witnesses regarding discovery materials and the defense's ability to name victims who have already gone public. The document includes redactions of the names of the Assistant U.S. Attorneys involved.
EFTA00029843.pdf
This document is an email chain from March 9, 2021, regarding the legal case U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell (20 Cr. 330). Laura Menninger of Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C. writes to Judge Nathan to submit a letter detailing Ms. Maxwell's objections to redactions proposed by the government in their Omnibus Response. The email includes several attachments related to these redactions and exhibits.
EFTA00029816.pdf
This document is a legal memorandum filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team on January 25, 2021, seeking to suppress evidence obtained via subpoena from the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner. The defense argues that the government made false representations to Judge McMahon to bypass a civil protective order and obtain confidential deposition transcripts, alleging collusion between the civil plaintiff's lawyers (Boies Schiller) and federal prosecutors. The document details the history of the civil defamation case, specific deposition questions regarding sexual acts and Epstein, and the procedural history of the protective order modification.
EFTA00029241.pdf
A letter from defense attorney Christian R. Everdell to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated April 8, 2021, regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter requests permission for defense counsel to bring electronics and specific legacy media equipment (VCR, cassette players, etc.) into the courthouse for an evidence view scheduled for mid-April 2021.
EFTA00029100.pdf
This legal filing is a Reply Memorandum by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team, arguing for the suppression of evidence and dismissal of charges based on government misconduct. The defense asserts that prosecutors misled Chief Judge McMahon about the extent of their prior coordination with civil attorneys (Boies Schiller Flexner) to obtain a grand jury subpoena, thereby circumventing a civil protective order. The document details a specific meeting on February 29, 2016, where civil attorneys 'pitched' the prosecution of Maxwell and provided documents, including flight records (though the specific flight data is not listed in this text), which the prosecution later failed to disclose to the judge.
EFTA00028974.pdf
This document is a Reply Memorandum filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team on March 15, 2021, supporting a motion to dismiss counts 1-4 of the superseding indictment. The defense argues that the indictment lacks specificity regarding names, dates, and details of the allegations, preventing Maxwell from preparing an adequate defense. The filing criticizes the government for using vague categories like 'Minor Victims' and 'multiple minor girls' without clarification and cites legal precedents to argue that the lack of specificity violates due process.
EFTA00028968.pdf
This document is a Reply Memorandum filed on March 15, 2021, by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team in the Southern District of New York. The defense argues that Counts 1 and 3 of the Superseding Indictment are multiplicitous (charging the same crime twice based on identical facts) and requests the Court order the government to elect one count to prosecute and dismiss the other prior to trial to avoid jury prejudice. The filing contends that the government has failed to prove the existence of two distinct conspiracies.
EFTA00028929.pdf
This document is a Reply Memorandum filed by Ghislaine Maxwell in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, requesting the suppression of evidence obtained from a government subpoena to Boies Schiller and dismissal of counts five and six. It includes a Table of Contents, Table of Authorities citing various legal cases and rules, and a Table of Exhibits detailing communications and notes related to the case from 2016 to 2021, many involving AUSAs and individuals like Peter Skinner, Stan Pottinger, Brad Edwards, and Sigrid McCawley. The memorandum argues that the government misled the court and that the evidence should be suppressed due to due process violations.
EFTA00028903.pdf
This document is a Reply Memorandum filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team on March 15, 2021, supporting a motion to dismiss counts one through four of her indictment as time-barred. The defense argues that the 2003 Amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 3283, which extended the statute of limitations, cannot be applied retroactively because Congress explicitly rejected a retroactivity provision. Additionally, the defense contends that the Mann Act offenses charged (enticement to travel and transportation of a minor) do not 'necessarily entail' the sexual abuse of a child, and thus the extended statute of limitations under § 3283 does not apply.
EFTA00028880.pdf
This document is a Reply Memorandum filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team on March 15, 2021, supporting her motion to dismiss the indictment based on the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) Jeffrey Epstein signed in Florida. Maxwell argues that the NPA's clause immunizing 'potential co-conspirators of Epstein' explicitly covers her and bars the current prosecution in the Southern District of New York. The defense contends that the government's attempt to limit the NPA geographically (to Florida) or to specific crimes is contradicted by the plain text of the agreement and legal precedent regarding plea agreements.
EFTA00028274.pdf
This document is a letter dated November 8, 2021, from defense attorney Christian R. Everdell to the US Attorney's Office regarding United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It serves as a Rule 16 disclosure, listing specific documents the defense may use in their case-in-chief, including AT&T phone records, FedEx records, Customs and Border Patrol records, Shopper's Travel records, and Larry Visoski flight manifests. The letter also lists General Releases from the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program (with names redacted), Palm Beach residence floorplans, and the Jeffrey Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement.
EFTA00028183.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) and defense counsel for Ghislaine Maxwell (Laura Menninger) from March 2021. The correspondence concerns the scheduling of a review of 'highly confidential images' and physical evidence at 500 Pearl Street, as well as the production of indices listing items seized by the FBI from Jeffrey Epstein's residences in New York and the Virgin Islands in 2019. The prosecutor clarifies which items are indexed in spreadsheets versus search warrant returns and coordinates a phone call to discuss these matters.
EFTA00028103.pdf
A formal 'Touhy request' letter dated August 30, 2021, from Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney Christian Everdell to Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Polite. The letter requests the testimony of four redacted FBI/Task Force agents for Maxwell's upcoming trial. These agents were involved in two key investigations: the 2006-2008 Palm Beach FBI investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and the subsequent New York FBI investigation that led to the 2019/2020 indictments of Epstein and Maxwell.
EFTA00025206.pdf
This document is an email chain from March 2021 between defense attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell (Laura Menninger, et al.) and Assistant United States Attorneys for the Southern District of New York. The correspondence concerns scheduling a call to discuss evidence requests and includes the transmission of an index of physical items held in FBI custody by the Miami office. The prosecutor references a previous discovery production from August 2020 and specific Bates ranges for scanned items.
EFTA00025196.pdf
This document is a chain of emails from March 8-9, 2021, between defense attorney Laura Menninger and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding the case US v. Maxwell. The correspondence concerns a request to view evidence, specifically discussing spreadsheets indexing physical evidence seized by the FBI from Jeffrey Epstein's residences in New York and the US Virgin Islands in 2019. The prosecutors note that while some evidence is indexed in Excel, other items like search warrant returns are not, and they mention specific Bates ranges for previously produced scans.
Opposition to motion
Maurene Comey informed Christian R. Everdell that the Government does not oppose the motion for Cohen & Gresser to be relieved as counsel.
Submission of reply memoranda and exhibits
The letter states an intention to submit all reply memoranda and exhibits by email to the Court and the government.
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN
Email address ceverdell@cohengresser.com provided for Christian R. Everdell, lead attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell.
Representation of Maxwell
Confirmed Maxwell retained Markus Moss for unsealing motion and Markus is prepared for deadlines.
Service of a memorandum
Christian R. Everdell certifies that he served a memorandum via the Electronic Case Filing (ECF) system to four individuals at the U.S. Department of Justice.
Response to Court's order
Defense submitting proposed questions for the hearing related to Maxwell's Motion for a New Trial.
Service of a memorandum
Christian R. Everdell certifies that he served a memorandum via the Electronic Case Filing (ECF) system to four individuals at the U.S. Department of Justice.
Extension of Time
Request for extension
Sealing Motion for New Trial
Letter regarding sealing the motion for a new trial
Redaction
Letter regarding redaction
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request for additional jury instructions regarding Counts Two and Four based on a jury note.
N/A
Letter referenced in Table of Contents
Video Monitors
Joint letter regarding video monitors
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request for extension on filing joint proposed jury charge and verdict sheet.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request for extension to file joint proposed jury charge and verdict sheet.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Submission of unsealed copies of Exhibits D, E, F, and G related to Ms. Maxwell's motion to suppress, pursuant to a court order.
Cover Letter for Omnibus Reply Memorandum
Support of Defendant's Supplemental Pretrial Motions
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Notification regarding the filing of an Omnibus Reply Memorandum under seal due to confidential discovery information.
Hard Drives
Letter regarding hard drives.
Hard Drives
Correspondence regarding hard drives.
Proposed Pretrial Schedule
Defense submission regarding the schedule for pretrial proceedings.
Grand Jury Motion
Letter regarding Grand Jury Motion.
Notice of Motion and Affirmation
A certification that a copy of the 'Notice of Motion and Affirmation' was served via First Class Mail to David Oscar Markus and Ghislaine Maxwell.
Motion to withdraw as appellate counsel
Motion requesting to relieve Christian R. Everdell and Cohen & Gresser LLP as counsel because Maxwell has retained David Oscar Markus.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request for defense counsel to bring electronics and specific legacy media playback equipment (VCR, cassette player, etc.) to the courthouse for an evidence view involving the defendant.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity