Epstein Secrets

estion' ") (citation omitted). Eagle Hosp. Physicians. LLC v. SRC Consulting, Inc., 561 F.3d 1298, 1303-05 (11th Cir. 2009). Brink's Inc. v. City of New York, 717 F.2d 700. 709-10 (2d Cir. 1983). Cablevision Systems Corp. v. DePalma. No. CV-87- 3528 (JLC), 1989 WL 8165, at *4-5 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 17, 1989); se

96), a leak of confidential interview transcripts from CBS to the New York Daily News during the epic face-off between 60 Minutes and whistleblower Jeffrey Wigand on one side and the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company on the other, did not waive CBS's privilege in the documents under the Shield Law except as t

estion' ") (citation omitted). Eagle Hosp. Physicians. LLC v. SRC Consulting, Inc., 561 F.3d 1298, 1303-05 (11th Cir. 2009). Brink's Inc. v. City of New York, 717 F.2d 700. 709-10 (2d Cir. 1983). Cablevision Systems Corp. v. DePalma. No. CV-87- 3528 (JLC), 1989 WL 8165, at *4-5 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 17, 1989); se

96), a leak of confidential interview transcripts from CBS to the New York Daily News during the epic face-off between 60 Minutes and whistleblower Jeffrey Wigand on one side and the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company on the other, did not waive CBS's privilege in the documents under the Shield Law except as t

tion (whether Edwards participated in Rothstein's fraudulent Ponzi scheme, not whether Epstein sexually abused Jane Doe) and entirely different law (New York's stringent Shield Iaw, not the less protective federal reporter's privilege). And the unpublished Epstein interview, which was conducted months befo

ld that a leak of confidential interview transcripts from CBS to the New York Daily News during the epic battle between 60 Minutes and whistleblower Jeffrey Wigand on one side and the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company on the other, did nor waive CBS's privilege in the documents under the New York Shield Law e