Epstein Secrets

s at publication, defined as the earliest date on which the work was placed on sale or became generally available to the public.' " Van Buskirk v. The New York Times Co. 325 F.3d 87, 89 (2d Cir. 2003) (Quoting Tomasino v. William Morrow & Co. 174 A.D.2d 734, 571 N.Y.S.2d 571, 572 (2d Dep't 1991)). Dershowitz invoke

thereo is fore the Court. Attorneys and Law Firms *566 Sigrid S. McCawley, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Joshua Schiller, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiff. Arthur Louis Aidala, Law Offices of Aidala & Bertuna, P.C., Brooklyn, NY, Christian Kiely, Howard M. Coo

7) 13 Hunt v. Enzo Biochem, Inc., 904 F. Supp. 2d 337 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) 12 In re Long Island Lighting Co., 129 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 1997) 15 In re New York Times Co., 828 F.2d 110 (2d Cir. 1987) 20 In re Sims v. Blot, 534 F.3d 117 (2d Cir. 2008) 14 In re Teligent, Inc., 640 F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 2011) 9 In re

tion that it properly was a recipient of the material: [W]hatever Cooper & Kirk's intentions in requesting and obtaining the Maxwell materials from Boies Schiller, the Maxwell Protective -footnote cont'd on next page- 10 EFTA00074919 Case 20-2413, Document 10-1, 07/30/2020, 2896538, Page18 of 38 On July 23

y was balanced against "the duty of the courts," id. at 602, including the duty to ensure fairness to the defendants, see W. at 602 n.14. In In re New York Times Co., 828 F.2d 110 (2d Cir. 1987), cited with approval in United States v. Longueuil, 567 Fed. App'x 13,16 (2d Cir. 2014), Judge Weinstein denied the med

tion that it properly was a recipient of the material: [W]hatever Cooper & Kirk's intentions in requesting and obtaining the Maxwell materials from Boies Schiller, the Maxwell Protective Order explicitly provides that (1) discovery materials designated CONFIDENTIAL cannot be EFTA00094806 Case 1:15-cv-07433-

was balanced against "the duty of the courts," id. at 602, including the duty to ensure fairness to the defendants, see id. at 602 n.14. In In re New York Times Co., 828 F.2d 110 (2d Cir. 1987), cited with approval in United States v. Longueuil, 567 Fed. App'x 13, 16 (2d Cir. 2014), Judge Weinstein denied the me

tion that it properly was a recipient of the material: [W]hatever Cooper & Kirk's intentions in requesting and obtaining the Maxwell materials from Boies Schiller, the Maxwell Protective Order explicitly provides that (1) discovery materials designated CONFIDENTIAL cannot be EFTA00075057 Caest 131-63.403481