Epstein Secrets

- cations with former co-counsel would have harmed attorneys in ongoing litigation. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 24(a), 28 U.S.C.App.(2006 Ed.). 2. Federal Courts a=21 Ancillary proceeding to sanction for- mer attorneys' former co-counsel was not warranted in action brought by condomini- um association agains

he defendants deposed the following witnesses, who are the subject of-this motion: Edgar J. Sharbaugh, Dr. Robert Henderson, Robert Picard, Todd Henderson, and Jeffrey Fara. FN4. While instructions not to an- swer questions during depositions are generally improper, a witness may be instructed not to

ales transactions of the plaintiff, as well as product identification and sales in- formation of the company between 1991 and 1993. Id. at 2-3. Dr. Henderson is a co-owner and the president of Nutramax. He is the inventor of the two patents which are the subject of this litigation, and was *471 deposed

rsity jurisdiction, which requires complete diversity of citizenship." Henderson'. Washington Nat. Ins. Co., 454 F.3d 1278, 1281 (11th Cir. 2006). Federal Courts are obligated to construe removal statutes very strictly, and "all doubts about jurisdiction should be resolved in favor of remand to state court."

. Such a remand is the necessary corollary of a federal district court's diversity jurisdiction, which requires complete diversity of citizenship." Henderson'. Washington Nat. Ins. Co., 454 F.3d 1278, 1281 (11th Cir. 2006). Federal Courts are obligated to construe removal statutes very strictly, and "all

rsity jurisdiction, which requires complete diversity of citizenship." Henderson'. Washington Nat. Ins. Co., 454 F.3d 1278, 1281 (1Ith Cir. 2006). Federal Courts are obligated to construe removal statutes very strictly, and "all doubts about jurisdiction should be resolved in favor of remand to state court."

. Such a remand is the necessary corollary of a federal district court's diversity jurisdiction, which requires complete diversity of citizenship." Henderson'. Washington Nat. Ins. Co., 454 F.3d 1278, 1281 (1Ith Cir. 2006). Federal Courts are obligated to construe removal statutes very strictly, and "all