Opinion
19 Civ. 3377 (LAP)
09-16-2021
VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE, Plaintiff, v. ALAN DERSHOWITZ, Defendants.
ORDER
LORETTA A. PRESKA, Senior United States District Judge
The Court is in receipt of Mr. Dershowitz's letters (see dkt. nos. 334, 335, 341, 342) requesting relief from the protective order to allow him to disclose a settlement agreement designated as confidential in this case to counsel for Prince Andrew in a different case, viz., Giuffre v. Prince Andrew, Duke of York, 21 Civ. 06702 (LAK) (a case in which Mr. Dershowitz is not a party). Ms. Giuffre (a party in that case and this case) opposes the request. (See dkt. nos. 337, 338, 340). Mr. Dershowitz seeks this relief “as a matter of professional ethics” (dkt. no. 341 at 1) to fulfill his “professional obligation” to ensure that Ms. Giuffre cannot assert claims in another lawsuit that Mr. Dershowitz believes are barred based on his reading of a settlement agreement, (dkt. no. 334 at 1).
There is no basis for Mr. Dershowitz's requesting a document subject to the protective order for use in another case to which he is not a party. To the Court's knowledge, Mr. Dershowitz has not been commissioned as a roving ethics monitor.
The Court notes, however, that parties who have standing (here, for example, Ms. Giuffre (who, as noted, is opposed) and perhaps Prince Andrew, who has not been heard from) may seek to lift the protective order for valid reasons, and, as Ms. Giuffre's counsel noted, Prince Andrew is likely to seek to obtain the settlement agreement in discovery in Giuffre v. Prince Andrew, Duke of York in any event.
Accordingly, for the reasons noted above, Mr. Dershowitz's request to permit disclosure of the settlement agreement (dkt. nos. 334, 335) is denied.
SO ORDERED.