Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
as standing. 1 B. There is no good faith. 5 C. The government's inevitable discovery doctrine fails. 5 II. The Government's violation of Manindell requires suppression. 7 III. The Government's violation of the Fifth Amendment requires suppression 10 IV. The Court should hold an evidentiary
1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
as standing. 1 B. There is no good faith. 5 C. The government's inevitable discovery doctrine fails. 5 II. The Government's violation of Manindell requires suppression. 7 III. The Government's violation of the Fifth Amendment requires suppression 10 IV. The Court should hold an evidentiary
1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
as standing. 1 B. There is no good faith. 5 C. The government's inevitable discovery doctrine fails. 5 II. The Government's violation of Manindell requires suppression. 7 III. The Government's violation of the Fifth Amendment requires suppression 10 IV. The Court should hold an evidentiary
1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
atively limited, due to the confidential nature" of the litigation. (Id. at 2 n.1). The Government also submitted that the court need not employ the Manindell balancing test to evaluate the Government's ability to obtain access to materials covered by a protective order because (1) the Martindell balancin
75 Smith y. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) 117, 118 Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003) 45 Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965) 300 Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975) 299,300 Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) 56 Thom v. Ashcroft, 369 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2004) 47 T
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (216)
Entities connected to both Manindell and Emmy Taylor
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON7 w/ Manindell·1,366 w/ Emmy
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON7 w/ Manindell·512 w/ Emmy
Prince Andrew
PERSON2 w/ Manindell·380 w/ Emmy
Julie K. Brown
PERSON6 w/ Manindell·298 w/ Emmy
United States
LOCATION3 w/ Manindell·296 w/ Emmy
Virginia Giuffre
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·245 w/ Emmy
Michael Jackson
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·234 w/ Emmy
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·234 w/ Emmy
Stephen Hawking
PERSON5 w/ Manindell·220 w/ Emmy
George Mitchell
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·201 w/ Emmy
Michael Cohen
PERSON4 w/ Manindell·177 w/ Emmy
MF
Maria Farmer
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·154 w/ Emmy
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION3 w/ Manindell·151 w/ Emmy
Michigan
LOCATION3 w/ Manindell·144 w/ Emmy
the Southern District
LOCATION6 w/ Manindell·139 w/ Emmy
Colorado
LOCATION4 w/ Manindell·139 w/ Emmy
Bradley Edwards
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·137 w/ Emmy
Chris Tucker
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·128 w/ Emmy
MW
Martin Weinberg
PERSON3 w/ Manindell·123 w/ Emmy
Minnesota
LOCATION3 w/ Manindell·110 w/ Emmy