21 H3VOGIU1 ih before or after Ms. Giuffre was abused by defendant is 2 irrelevant to this action and should be excluded under Rule 3 401. 4 It is also, of course, highly prejudicial and should 5 be excluded under Rule 403. Whether or not Ms. Giuffre ever 6 used drugs while not being abused by defendant does not go to 7 any claim or defenses in this case. 8 Courts in the Southern District of New York routinely 9 exclude evidence of prior drug use under both of these rules, 10 as fully briefed in the papers. Defendant attempts to admit 1a this evidence of prescription drug use related to damages, 12 specifically whether or not the emotional distress Ms. Giuffre 13 suffered is preexisting. 14 THE COURT: And why do you have it in your expert's 15 report? 16 MS. SCHULTZ: Well, our expert is -- I'm assuming de you're referring to Dr. Kliman, who is a physician. He's a 18 medical doctor. He took a full -- 19 THE COURT: There's a whole thing about it. Are you 20 going to withdraw the -- 21 MS. SCHULTZ: No, your Honor. We're only claiming 22 damages with respect to the emotional distress suffered from 23 the defamation. And also, taking drugs prescribed for various 24 mental health issues is not the same thing as emotional 25 distress. They're two different issues. So any marginal SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011324