Epstein Secrets

ion and bolsters the conclusion that Fisher's tax return is entitled to protection from disclosure by the Government in this action. See Richards v. Stephens, 118 F.R.D. 338, 339 (S.D.N.Y.1988) (s 6103 is intended to protect the confidentiality of taxpayers' returns by "regulat[ing] ... disclosure of tax

n were severed in 1980, the Office of Foreign Missions ("OFM") of the United States Department of State took possession of the building pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. s 4301 et seq. OFM leased the building to Epstein in 1992. Epstein eventually sublet the premises to Fisher, purportedly without the Gove

tion and bolsters the conclusion that Fisher's tax return is entitled to protection from disclosure by the Government in this action. See Richards I Stephens, 118 F.R.D. 338, 339 (S.D.N.Y.1988) (s 6103 is intended to protect the confidentiality of taxpayers' returns by "regulat[ing] ... disclosure of tax

n were severed in 1980, the Office of Foreign Missions ("OFM") of the United States Department of State took possession of the building pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. s 4301 et seq. OFM leased the building to Epstein in 1992. Epstein eventually sublet the premises to Fisher, purportedly without the Gove

ion and bolsters the conclusion that Fisher's tax return is entitled to protection from disclosure by the Govemment in this action. See Richards v. Stephens, 118 F.R.D. 338, 339 (S.D.N.Y.1988) (s 6103 is intended to protect the confidentiality of taxpayers' returns by "regulat[ing] ... disclosure of tax

n were severed in 1980, the Office of Foreign Missions ("OFM") of the United States Department of State took possession of the building pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. s 4301 et seq. OFM leased the building to Epstein in 1992. Epstein eventually sublet the premises to Fisher, purportedly without the Gov