Epstein Secrets

mpelled testimonial aspect. See United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 35-36 (2000). Thus, where the exis

inst Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein". Erie R.Co. v. Tompkins, 58 S.Ct. 817 (1938). Accordingly, the privileges

tance where "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Case 9:08-cv-80119-K

ed claims in Counts I - Sexual Battery and Counts II - Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress are also controlled by state law. Erie R.Co. v. Tompkins, 58 S.Ct. 817 (1938). Accordingly, the privileges recognized under state law apply to this action under Rule 501. See, for example, 1550 Brickell A

tance where "the act of producing documents in response to a subpoena (or production request) has a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence EFTA00222080 Case 9:0

ed claims in Counts I - Sexual Battery and Counts II - Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress are also controlled by state law. Erie R.Co. v. Tompkins, 58 S.Ct. 817 (1938). Accordingly, the privileges recognized under state law apply to this action under Rule 501. See, for example, 1550 Brickell A