DOJ-OGR-00011462.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 734 Filed 07/15/22 Page12 of 16 November 19, 2021 Page Twelve district have ordered plaintiffs to produce their EVCP releases to Maxwell (in one case with the amount redacted), so she is already aware of the content of the EVCP’s general release.” Forcing the EVCP to turn over information it promised all claimants it would keep confidential—an indispensable condition that victims relied upon—would “disembowel the very core” of this program and others like it.°° Compliance would be unreasonable and oppressive and, accordingly, this Court should quash the subpoena. B. The documents sought are inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 408. The subpoena should also be quashed because the records sought are inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 408. Rule 17(c), in general, authorizes subpoenas returnable before trial, as well as subpoenas returnable at trial “to obtain impeachment material.” United States v. Donziger, No. 19-CR-561 (LAP), 2021 WL 1865376, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. May 10, 2021). The test set forth in Nixon “governs both varieties” of subpoenas. Donziger, 2021 WL 1865376, at *4. Under Nixon, the subpoena must “clear three hurdles: (1) relevancy; (2) admissibility; (3) specificity.” Nixon, 418 U.S. at 700. Here, Maxwell’s subpoena fails, at a minimum, to clear the admissibility hurdle, because Rule 408 makes the documents sought largely, if not entirely, inadmissible. Under Rule 408(a), evidence of accepting a valuable consideration to compromise a claim, as well as statements or conduct made in connection with negotiations about the claim, are “not admissible—on behalf of any party—either to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or a contradiction.” Fed. R. Evid. 408(a). Inadmissibility under Rule 408 provides a basis to quash a Rule 17(c) subpoena. See See Order, dated Feb. 16, 2021 (ECF No. 120), at 2 in Farmer v. Indyke, 19 Civ. 10475 (S.D.N.Y.); Order, dated Mar. 19, 2021 (ECF No. 102) § 2, in Doe v. Indyke, 20 Civ. 484 (S.D.N.Y.). °° Ex, A 14 (Feldman Decl.). DOJ-OGR-00011462