Epstein Secrets

trial after the jury rendered verdict, it would have been within the district court's discretion to sua sponte suggest remittitur."); Cook v. its Ross EFTA00727610 Addle, et al. v. Kjaer, et al. Civil No. 2004-135 Judgment Page 6 Island Sand & Gravel Co., 626 F.2d 746, 747 (9th Cir. 1980) (a

ue is often disputed, the court has discretion to award prejudgment interest to avoid injustice. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 913(1)(b) (1965). The Third Circuit has explained the considerations that should guide a district court in exercising its discretion to award prejudgment interest: EFTA00727608 Add

ng domestic drug interdiction checkpoints "does not affect the validity of border searches or searches at places like airports"): United States v. Ross. 456 U.S. 798. 823. 102 &Ct. 2157, 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982) (explaining that while the Fourth Amendment gives protection to containers in domestic ve

ms officials, rather than upon constitutional requirements applied to the inapposite context of this son of search." Id. at 507 (emphasis added). The Third Circuit similarly rejected a reasonable suspicion requirement for border searches of electronic data, albeit in an unpublished opinion. See United States

ct Court for the Dis- trict of South Carolina, G. Ross Anderson, Jr., J., certified class, and lender a

request a sampling of voting records can hardly be EFTA00191853 806 770 FEDERAL REPORTER, 2d SERIES described as a purely administrative act. The Third Circuit has highlighted this as- pect of a prosecutor's duties: We recognize that the decision of the Attorney General, or a prosecuting attor- ney, to ini