Epstein Secrets

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

to disclosure at the instant discovery stage. See Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978).

the discovery of admissible evidence. Rule 26(b)(l), Fed.R.Civ.P.; Donahay v. Palm Beach Tours & trans., Inc., 242 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). See Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-08 (1947); Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 351 (1978). In Oppenheimer, the Supreme Court discussed th

2 F.R.D. 685 (S.D. Fla. 2007). See Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-08 (1947); Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 351 (1978). In Oppenheimer, the Supreme Court discussed the concept of relevance in relation to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b) and noted that: The key phrase in this definition - "rel

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 v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-508 (1947); Farnsworth v. Proctor and Gamble Co., 758 F.2d 1545, 1547 (11th Cir. 1985)(the Federal Rules of Civil Proced

bear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978).

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

bear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978).

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

ear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978).

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

to disclosure at the instant discovery stage. See Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340. 352 (1978).

mation need not be admissible at trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Id: see also Hickman I2 EFTA00728605 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);

bear on any issue that is or may be in the case? Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978).

tion need not be admissible at trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Id.; see also Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-508, 67 S. Ct. 385, 91 L. Ed. 451 (1947); Farnsworth v. Proctor and Gamble Co., 758 F.2d 1545, 1547 (11th Cir. 1985)(t

ear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352, 98 S. C

tion need not be admissible at trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Id.; see also Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507-508, 67 S. Ct. 385, 91 L. Ed. 451 (1947); Farnsworth v. Proctor and Gamble Co., 758 F.2d 1545, 1547 (11th Cir. 1985)(t

ear on any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352, 98 S. C