Epstein Secrets

ness of hard science methodologies." E.E.O.C. v. Bloomberg L.P., No. 07-CV-8383 (LAP), 2010 WL 3466370, at

istinction—permitting cross-examination on drug use but excluding a formal diagnosis of addiction—in several cases. E.g., DiPaolo, 804 F.2d at 230; Dobson v. Walker, 150 F. App'x 49,52 (2d Cir. 2005) (explaining that cross- examination about a witness's drug use before witnessing a murder would be admissible, but

ness of hard science methodologies." E.E.O.C. v. Bloomberg L.P., No. 07-CV-8383 (LAP), 2010 WL 3466370, at

istinction—permitting cross-examination on drug use but excluding a formal diagnosis of addiction—in several cases. E.g., DiPaolo, 804 F.2d at 230; Dobson v. Walker, 150 F. App'x 49,52 (2d Cir. 2005) (explaining that cross- examination about a witness's drug use before witnessing a murder would be admissible, but

ness of hard science methodologies." E.E.O.C. v. Bloomberg L.P., No. 07-CV-8383 (LAP), 2010 WL 3466370, at

uch a distinction—permitting cross-examination on drug use but excluding a formal diagnosis ofilM—in several cases. E.g., DiPaolo, 804 F.2d at 230; Dobson v. Walker, 150 F. App'x 49,52 (2d Cir. 2005) (explaining that cross- examination about a witness's drug use before witnessing a murder would be admissible, but