Document Mentions (4 shared documents)

EFTA00210140

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

65 at 13). Second, they argue that the doctrine does not apply because the conduct of those prosecutors is a "central issue" in this case. a at 15). The Courts finds these arguments unavailing. First, Petitioners argue that the "work product doctrine does not apply to claims advanced by crime victims that

ereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Government shall produce documents consistent with the following Table. It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Intervenor Epstein's Motion for the Court to Protect From Disclosure Grand Jury Materials (DE 263) is GRANTED, and Petitioners' Motion to Seal (DE 267) is DENIED in light of this Court's Order at DE 326; DE 268 is hereby U

EFTA02335898

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

5 at 13). Second, they argue that the doctrine does not apply because the conduct of those prosecutors is a "central issue" in this case. (1 at 15). The Courts finds these arguments unavailing. First, Petitioners argue that the "work product doctrine does not apply to claims advanced by crime victims that

EFTA00086375_sub_001 - EFTA00086375_100

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

at 13). Second, they argue that the doctrine does not apply because the conduct of those prosecutors is a "central issue" in this case. (a. at 15). The Courts finds these arguments unavailing. First, Petitioners argue that the "work product doctrine does not apply to claims advanced by crime victims that

Mutual Connections (61)

Entities connected to both The Courts and Intervenor Epstein's Motion for the Court to Protect From Disclosure Grand

Subpoena Duces Tecum