Epstein Secrets

er questions or to produce documents is improper. Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987).

)(3) was adopted in 1970 to codify the holding in Hickman v. Taylor, 1 329 U.S. 495 (1947). 10 involving co

er questions or to produce documents is improper. Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987).

discovery of admissible evidence." Id.; see also Hickman Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 242 Entered o

80). When the Fifth Amendment privilege is raised as a bar to discovery, a blanket refusal to answer questions or to produce documents is improper. Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987). Instead, the privilege must be asserted in response to a particular question, and in each instanc

ation need not be admissible at trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Id.; see also Hickman 12 EFTA00723247 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 242 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2009 Page 13 of 22 v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-508 (1947); Far

80). When the Fifth Amendment privilege is raised as a bar to discovery, a blanket refusal to answer questions or to produce documents is improper. Anglada v. Sprague, 822 F.2d 1035, 1037 (11th Cir. 1987). Instead, the privilege must be asserted in response to a particular question, and in each instanc

nsidered the facts alleged in the Complaints, the elements needed to convict Epstein of ' Rule 26(b)(3) was adopted in 1970 to codify the holding in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (1947). 10 EFTA00592200 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 462 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/04/2010 Page 11 of 14 a crime, th