Epstein Secrets

Cal. Rptr. 3d 467 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) 28, 29 iii D14'71584534593 3970112-000042 EFTA00596452 O'Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975) 13 O'Neill v. Oakgrove Coast. Inc., 71 1.2d 521, 528 ad 1 (1988) 1, 2, 22 People ex reL Scott v. Silverstein, 412 II2d 692 (III. App. Ct. 1980), rev d on o

nfidential source and his unpublished interview therefore fell within the federal qualified privilege that governs non-confidential news material in the Second Circuit. Dist. Ct. Op. at 4 (quoting Gonzales v. NBC, 194 F.3d 29, 36 (2d Cir. 1999)). Applying the federal qualified privilege standard (which is signific

) the strength of t e evidence upon which the pretrial detention was based." tired States Milian, 4 F.3d 1038, 1043 (2d Cir. 1993); United States O'Neill, 52 F. Supp. 2d 954, 960 (ED. Wis. 1999)(to get to first base on this issue, the defendant must show that either the prosecution or the court has u

citations omitted). ht determining how much weight to accord the presumption after the defendant has come forward to meet his burden of production, the Second Circuit explains: A judicial officer conducting a detention hearing should, even after a defendant has come forward with rebuttal evidence, continue to giv

a Rural Legal Assistance, Marysville, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants. William T. hfcGivens, and John D. O'Con- nor, Tarkington, Carey, O'Connor & O'Neill, San Francisco, Cal., for defend- ants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Califor- nia. Before W

ers, Inc., Petitioners-Ap- pellees, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellant. No. 474, Docket 95-6119. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued Aug. 81, 1996. Decided Oct. 17, 1996. Government appealed from order en- tered in the United States District Court for the Eastern Distri

ratore a back massage while Libera- tore lay on Poe's bed. (Summary at 2.) With regard to Plaintiff, in January of 2001, Bishop Timlin received the O'Neill Letter informing him that Plaintiff often- times slept overnight in Liberatore's bed- room at the Rectory and that Liberatore had taken Plaintiff o

it as a pattern of racketeering activity"); see also Cofacredit, S.A. v. Windsor Plumbing Supply Co.. 187 F.3d 229, 242 (2d Cir.1999) (noting that the Second Circuit "has never held a period of less than two years to constitute a substantial period of time"). Second, the criminal activities allegedly committed