Epstein Secrets

ppeals by claimants of a privilege in 10 EFTA00209394 Case: 13-12923 Date ITIsicloDUtp/2014 Page: 11 of 23 some civil proceedings. See Castle. Sangamo Weston, Inc., 744 F.2d 1464, 1465- 66 (11th Cir. 1984) (exercising jurisdiction because the appellant "claims a privilege of non-disclosure relating to mat

rane, 625 F.3d at 572 (ruling that "Perlman and Mohawk are not in tension" when the claimant of a privilege is not a party). But see United States. Copar Pumice Co., Inc., 714 F.3d 1197, 1207-09 (10th Cir. 2013) (holding that jurisdiction under the Perlman doctrine is limited to only the grand jury context, but decli

ppeals by claimants of a privilege in 10 EFTA00209435 Case: 13-12923 Date ITIsicloDUtp/2014 Page: 11 of 23 some civil proceedings. See Castle. Sangamo Weston, Inc., 744 F.2d 1464, 1465- 66 (11th Cir. 1984) (exercising jurisdiction because the appellant "claims a privilege of non-disclosure relating to mat

rane, 625 F.3d at 572 (ruling that "Perlman and Mohawk are not in tension" when the claimant of a privilege is not a party). But see United States. Copar Pumice Co., Inc., 714 F.3d 1197, 1207-09 (10th Cir. 2013) (holding that jurisdiction under the Perlman doctrine is limited to only the grand jury context, but decli

eals by claimants of a privilege in 10 EFTA00209641 Case: 13-12923 Date Filed: 04/18/2014 Page: 11 of 23 some civil proceedings. See Castle v. Sangamo Weston, Inc., 744 F.2d 1464, 1465- 66 (11th Cir. 1984) (exercising jurisdiction because the appellant "claims a privilege of non-disclosure relating to mat

ne, 625 F.3d at 572 (ruling that "Perlman and Mohawk are not in tension" when the claimant of a privilege is not a party). But see United States v. Copar Pumice Co., Inc., 714 F.3d 1197, 1207-09 (10th Cir. 2013) (holding that jurisdiction under the Perlman doctrine is limited to only the grand jury context, but decli

peals by claimants of a privilege in 10 EFTA00209750 Case: 13-12923 Date Filed: 04/18/2014 Page: 11 of 23 some civil proceedings. See Castle'. Sangamo Weston, Inc., 744 F.2d 1464, 1465- 66 (11th Cir. 1984) (exercising jurisdiction because the appellant "claims a privilege of non-disclosure relating to mat

ane, 625 F.3d at 572 (ruling that "Perlman and Mohawk are not in tension" when the claimant of a privilege is not a party). But see United States'. Copar Pumice Co., Inc., 714 F.3d 1197, 1207-09 (10th Cir. 2013) (holding that jurisdiction under the Perlman doctrine is limited to only the grand jury context, but decli