4
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
4 / 5
Mentions
008) (finding that where classified information presented at trial, if disclosed, would jeopardize national security weighed against public access); Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006) (existence of confidentiality order alone did not defeat presumption of public access); Hanf
Page: EFTA00020559 →nondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006) (existence of confidentiality order alone did not defeat presumption of public access); Hanford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, 380 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 2004) (establishing qualified First Amendment right of access to sealed docket sheets); Sec. Etch. Comm'n v. TheStreetcom, 273
Page: EFTA00020559 →s applying the "logic and experience" test have generally found a presumption of openness, based on the common law approach. Hartford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, 380 F.3d 83, 92 (2d Cir. 2004). WESTLAW © 2018 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 22 EFTA00020562 --- PAGE BREAK ---
Page: EFTA00020563 →the press and general public and whether public access plays a significant positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question." Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 120. The second, applied only when the court considers documents in proceedings covered by the First Amendment, asks whether the docume
Id. For the "experience-and-logic" approach, courts employ a two-pronged inquiry. Doe, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36605, at *4; Hartford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, 380 F.3d 83, 92 (2d Cir. 2004). First, courts must consider "whether the place and process have historically been open to the press and general pu
the press and general public and whether public access plays a significant positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question." Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 120. The second, applied only when the court considers documents in proceedings covered by the First Amendment, asks whether the docume
Id. For the "experience-and-logic" approach, courts employ a two-pronged inquiry. Doe, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36605, at *4; Hartford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, 380 F.3d 83, 92 (2d Cir. 2004). First, courts must consider "whether the place and process have historically been open to the press and general pu
of the press to enforce it is well settled. See, e.g., Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596, 609 n.25 (1982); Hanford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, 380 F.3d 83, 91 (2d Cir. 2004). EFTA00017095 --- PAGE BREAK --- filing, on August 28. See Dkt. 152. On August 29, the Government belatedly file
Page: EFTA00017095 →access to a document has been historically available (the "experience" prong) and would be valuable to the process in question (the "logic" prong). Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006). The weight of the common law presumption turns on "the role of the material at iss
Page: EFTA00017096 →Entities connected to both Lugosch and Pellegrino

Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSONSecond Circuit
ORGANIZATION
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSONOnondaga
LOCATIONAmodeo
PERSON
Julie K. Brown
PERSONPyramid Co. of Onondaga
ORGANIZATION
Prince Andrew
PERSON
United States
LOCATIONMartindell
PERSON
Virginia Giuffre
PERSON
Alan Dershowitz
PERSON
Bernstein
PERSONNewsday LLC
ORGANIZATIONSigrid McCawley
PERSON
Nassau
LOCATION
Denver
LOCATION
Hartford
LOCATIONJeffrey Pagliuca
PERSON
Press-Enterprise Co.
ORGANIZATION