Epstein Secrets

very of admissible evidence and the defendants have not made any showing to the contrary, this justification for [discovery] must fail. Id.; accord Reist, 2010 WL 4940096 at '2 (recognizing the "chilling effect" that discovery can have on the willingness of parties to enter into settlement negotiation

at a therapist's ability to help a patient "is completely dependent" upon the patient's "willingness and ability to talk freely." Id. at 10, quoting Advisory Committee's Notes to Proposed Rules, 56 F.R.D. 183, 242 (1972). The Court found that the psychotherapist-patient privilege is "rooted in the imperative need fo

ery of admissible evidence and the defendants have not made any showing to the contrary, this justification for [discovery] must fail. Id.; accord Reist, 2010 WL 4940096 at *2 (recognizing the "chilling effect" that discovery can have on the willingness of parties to enter into settlement negotiation

ability to help a patient "is completely EFTA00301870 dependent" upon the patient's "willingness and ability to talk freely." Id. at 10, quoting Advisory Committee's Notes to Proposed Rules, 56 183, 242 (1972). The Court found that the psychotherapist-patient privilege is "rooted in the imperative need for confi

ery of admissible evidence and the defendants have not made any showing to the contrary, this justification for [discovery] must fail. Id.; accord Reist, 2010 WL 4940096 at *2 (recognizing the "chilling effect" that discovery can have on the willingness of parties to enter into settlement negotiation

ability to help a patient "is completely EFTA00301893 dependent" upon the patient's "willingness and ability to talk freely." Id. at 10, quoting Advisory Committee's Notes to Proposed Rules, 56 183, 242 (1972). The Court found that the psychotherapist-patient privilege is "rooted in the imperative need for confi