Epstein Secrets

ommunication was made to him confidentially, in his professional capacity, for the purpose of securing legal advice or assistance. United States v. Schaltenbrand , 930 F.2d 1554, 1562 (11th Cir. 1991) (citations omitted). See also XYZ Corp. v. United States , 348 F.3d 16, 22 (1st Cir. 2003) ("The privilege pr

pressive." A grand jury subpoena must be reasonable, and, in making that determination, "what is reasonable depends on the context." New Jersey v. T.L.O. , 469 U.S. 325, 337 (1985). Likewise, whether a subpoena is oppressive depends on the context. In re August, 1993 Regular Grand Jury , 854E Supp. 13

communication was made to him confidentially, in his professional capacity, for the purpose of securing legal advice or assistance. United States I Schaltenbrand , 930 F.2d 1554, 1562 (11th Cir. 1991) (citations omitted). See also XYZ Corp. I United States , 348 F.3d 16, 22 (1st Cir. 2003) ("The privilege pro

oppressive." A grand jury subpoena must be reasonable, and, in making that determination, "what is reasonable depends on the context." New Jersey. T.L.O. , 469 U.S. 325, 337 (1985). Likewise, whether a subpoena is oppressive depends on the context. In re August, 1993 Regular Grand Jury , 854E Supp. 13

Its Applicability. Procedurally, the person asserting the privilege bears the burden of establishing its applicability. See, e.g., United States v. Schaltenbrand, 930 F.2d 1554 (11th Cir. 1991); United '8For purposes of this discussion, the requested documents will be jointly referred to as "billing records.

ppressive." A grand July subpoena must be reasonable, and, in making that determination, "what is reasonable depends on the context." New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 337 (1985). Likewise, whether a subpoena is oppressive depends on the context. In re August, 1993 Regular Grand Jury, 854 F. Supp. 13