Epstein Secrets

cond, courts must consider "whether public access plays a significant positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question." Id.; Hartford, 380 F.3d at 92 ("The courts that have undertaken this type of inquiry have generally 9 EFTA00073268 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1111 Filed 0

be designated a judicial document, "the item filed must be relevant to the performance of the judicial function and useful in the judicial process." Amodeo, 44 F.3d at 145. Judicial documents are considered on a "continuum," ranging from "matters that directly affect an adjudication to matters that com

cond, courts must consider "whether public access plays a significant positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question." Id.; Hartford, 380 F.3d at 92 ("The courts that have undertaken this type of inquiry have generally 9 EFTA00077319 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1111 Filed 0

be designated a judicial document, "the item filed must be relevant to the performance of the judicial function and useful in the judicial process." Amodeo, 44 F.3d at 145. Judicial documents are considered on a "continuum," ranging from "matters that directly affect an adjudication to matters that com

, Esq., Jeffrey S. Pagliuca, Esq., Ty Gee, Esq. Counsel for Intervenor Michael Cemovich: RANDAZZA LEGAL GROUP, PLLC, 100 Pearl Street, 14th Floor, Hartford, CT 06103, By: Jay M. Wolman, Esq. Counsel for Intervenor Alan Dershowitz: EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF & ABADY, LLP, 600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor, New

r district court to edit and redact judicial document to allow access to appropriate portions after weighing competing interests); United States v. Amodeo. 71 F.3d 1044 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Amodeo 11") (presumption of access afforded to particular document filed with court varies with document's relevance

Inc., 121 F.3d 818 (2d Cir. 1997) (sealing file pursuant to confidentiality agreement between parties was not abuse of discretion); United States v. Amodeo, 44 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Amodeo I") (finding it proper for district court to edit and redact judicial document to allow access to appropriate p

York, NY 10020 [email protected] [email protected] Jay M. Wolman Marc J. Randazza RANDAZZA LEGAL GROUP, PLLC 100 Pearl Street, 14th Floor Hartford, CT 06103 [email protected] [email protected] Is/ Nicole Simmons Nicole Simmons 2 EFTA00022962 --- PAGE BREAK --- casair.q.e2et43-(EgkirneDiAg

h dispositive motions such as motions for dismissal or summary judgment." Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41, 50 (2d Cir. 2019) (citing United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1049-50 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Amodeo II")); (b) any minimum presumption of public access is subject to many countervailing interests suppo