Epstein Secrets

Where is a presumption of adequate representation where an existing party seeks the same objectives as 5 EFTA00209268 the interveners," Stone v. First Union Corp., 371 F.3d 1305, 1311 (11th Cir. 2004), that presumption is a "weak" one, id.;"[i]nterveners need only show that the current [party's] representatio

hat the current [party's] representation 'may be inadequate,' and the burden for making such a showing is 'minimal.'" Id. (emphasis added), quoting Clark v. Putnam County, 168 F.3d 458, 461 (11th Cir. 1999). See, e.g., Georgia v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 302 F.3d 1242, 1255 (11th Cir. 2002)("The propose

uit has said that "Where is a presumption of adequate representation where an existing party seeks the same objectives as the interveners," Stone v. First Union Corp., 371 F.3d 1305, 1311 (11th Cir. 2004), that presumption is a "weak" one, id.;"[i]nterveners need only show that the current [party's) representatio

that the current [party's) representation `may be inadequate,' and the burden for making such a showing is 'minimal."' Id. (emphasis added), quoting Clark v. Putnam County, 168 F.3d 458, 461 (11th Cir. 1999). See, e.g., Georgia v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 302 F.3d 1242, 1255 (11th Cir. 2002) ("The propos

t has said that "[t]here is a presumption of adequate representation where an existing party seeks the same objectives as the interveners," Stone v. First Union Corp., 371 F.3d 1305, 1311 (11th Cir. 2004), that presumption is a "weak" one, id.;"[i]nterveners need only show that the current [party's] representatio

that the current [party's] representation `may be inadequate,' and the burden for making such a showing is 'minimal.'" Id. (emphasis added), quoting Clark v. Putnam County, 168 F.3d 458, 461 (11th Cir. 1999). See, e.g., Georgia v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 302 F.3d 1242, 1255 (11th Cir. 2002)("The propose

]here is a presumption of adequate representation where an existing party seeks the same objectives as 4 EFTA00584631 the interveners," Stone v. First Union Corp., 371 F.3d 1305, 1311 (1 1 th Cir. 2004), that presumption is a "weak" one, id.;"[i]nterveners need only show that the current [party's] representat

hat the current [party's] representation `may be inadequate,' and the burden for making such a showing is `minimal."' Id. (emphasis added), quoting Clark v. Putnam County, 168 F.3d 458, 461 (11th Cir. 1999). See, e.g., Georgia v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 302 F.3d 1242, 1255 (11th Cir. 2002)("The propose