Epstein Secrets

sociate General Counsel<Apan> Arizona State Universi <=u> => </= an> <mailto =div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001 tfont-size:12pt;font-family:"Times=New Roman",serif'> Lawrence Krauss (mailto Sent: Friday, February 23= 2018 4:19 PM To: Naimah Saadiq <mailto »; Cynthia Jewett < <mailto <mailto: Cc: Adam Wald

8 (Ct. App. Div. 2 1984), the c=urt recognized that the employer's response to a notice of charge o= discrimination filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was a=solutely privileged. In Miller v. Servicemaster by Rees, 174 Ariz. at 5=0, 851 P.2d 240, 243 (Ct. App. Div. 1 1993), the court recognized the

ings until such time as it determines that =t has completed its fact gathering. <=iv style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12ptfont-family:"Times=New Roman",serif'> Our courts recognize that participants in=an administrative investigation have a privilege against a defamation char=e. In Paros v. Hoemako Hospit

8 (Ct. App. Div. 2 1984), the court recognized that the employer's response to a notice of charge of discriminatio= filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was absolutely privileged. In Miller v. Servicemaster by Rees, 174 Ariz. at 520, 851 P.2d 240, 243 (Ct. App. Div. 1 1993), the court recognized the

=E2 s malfeasant attacks on Professor Krauss. We are still tallyi=g the damage. =div style="margin:Oin Oin 0.0001ptfont-size:12pefont-family:"Times=New Roman",serif'> 6 EFTA_R1_01657606 EFTA02520711 You and Buzzfeed will immediately cease and desist from further defamator= statements regarding Professor Krau

Ct. App. Div. 2 1984), the court recognized that the employer's response to a notice of charge of discrimination=20 filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was absolutely privileged. In Miller v. Servicemaster by Ree=, 174 Ariz. at 520, 851 P.2d 240, 243 (Ct. App. Div. 1 1993), the court recognized the