DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p02019.png

Case 18-2868, Document 287, 08/09/2019, 2628251, Page71 of 76 The anticipated litigation, according to the Press Release, was “redress at the repetition of such old defamatory claims.” See Press Release. According to Barden, Maxwell’s lawyer, he participated in the preparation of the Press Release, the purpose of the Press Release was to dissuade the media from publishing Giuffre’s allegations, and the implication of the Press Release was that any redress sought by Maxwell would be against the media. Giuffre has disputed Barden’s claim that the Press Release was his own statement. Certain of the cases cited by Maxwell in support of the privilege can be distinguished, according to Giuffre, in that they involve communications to or from parties to the ultimate litigation. See, e.g., Kirk v. Heppt, 532 F. Supp. 2d 586, 593 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (the communication at issue was made by an attorney’s client to the attorney’s malpractice carrier concerning the client’s justiciable controversy against the attorney over which the clients actually sued); Black v. Green Harbour Homeowners’ Ass’n, Inc., 19 A.D.3d 962, 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep’t 2005) (privilege applied to a letter sent by a home owner’s association board of directors to the association’s members informing them of the status of litigation to which the 71