Epstein Secrets

No. 13-CV-7360 (JPO), 2015 WL 5459713 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015), Judge Oetken concluded that Williams did not require the per se rule, did not adopt the Tenth Circuit's per se rule for BOP records, and followed a "practical approach," observing that "[t]he ordinary understanding of the term [law enforcement] includ

xpression for 13 EFTA00071572 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 20 of 30 which the protection is claimed." United States v. Schwinanzer, 892 F.2d 237, 243 (2d Cir. 1989). "[T]he traditional rationale for the [attorney-client] privilege applies with special force in the government co

No. 13-CV-7360 (JPO), 2015 WL 5459713 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015), Judge Oetken concluded that Williams did not require the per se rule, did not adopt the Tenth Circuit's per se rule for BOP records, and followed a "practical approach," observing that "[t]he ordinary understanding of the term [law enforcement] includ

xpression for 13 EFTA00075455 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 20 of 30 which the protection is claimed." United States v. Schwinanzer, 892 F.2d 237, 243 (2d Cir. 1989). "[T]he traditional rationale for the [attorney-client] privilege applies with special force in the government co

No. 13-CV-7360 (JPO), 2015 WL 5459713 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015), Judge Oetken concluded that Williams did not require the per se rule, did not adopt the Tenth Circuit's per se rule for BOP records, and followed a "practical approach," observing that "[t]he ordinary understanding of the term [law enforcement] includ

xpression for 13 EFTA00088689 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 20 of 30 which the protection is claimed." United States v. Schwinanzer, 892 F.2d 237, 243 (2d Cir. 1989). "[T]he traditional rationale for the [attorney-client] privilege applies with special force in the government co