Epstein Secrets

gotiations were not protected from disclosure by any common-law priv- ilege. Affirmed. West Headnotes (1] Federal Courts 170E E..t.. 3581(1) 170B Federal Courts 170BXVII Courts of Appeals 170BXVII(K) Scope and Extent of Review 170BXVII(K)2 Standard of Review 170Bk3576 Procedural Matters 170Bk3581 Jurisdi

ourt for the Southern District of Florida Court, No. 9:08-CV-80736-KAM, ordered disclosure. The inter- venors filed interlocutory appeal. Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Pryor, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) Court of Appeals had jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal; (2) plea negotiations were not protected from di

(2) federal court litigants could present request to district court for return of trial exhibits. Reversed and remanded. West Headnotes (8) [1] Federal Courts Trial Standard of review applicable to the denial of the common•law right of access to civil court proceedings is abuse of discretion. 9 Cases t

nia action. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Robert H. Hall, J., denied the request, and plaintiff appealed. The Court of Appeals held that: (1) desire of federal court litigants to prevent use of pleadings, docket entries, orders, affidavits, depositions, and transcripts or c

request filed within the context of an ongoing judicial proceeding, not a vehicle for launching a new and freestanding piece of litigation. 171 Federal Courts 4- Mandamus While a petition for a writ of mandamus is an original application to the Court of Appeals, the writ is not an independent grant of ap

tim's requested remedies were denied and the action was dismissed, 411 F.Supp.3d 1321. Alleged victim petitioned for writ of mandamus. (Holding:) The Court of Appeals, Newsom, Circuit Judge, held that as a matter of first impression, victim rights under CVRA, including the right to confer with government's lawye