Epstein Secrets

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x IN RE APPLICATION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS TO DAILY NEWS, L.P., AND GEORGE RUSH x No. 10 M8-85 (LLM) REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DAILY NEWS, L.P., AND DAILY NEWS JOURNALIST GEORGE RUSH IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO QUASH SUBP

nt of Justice 413 F.3d 53 (D.C. Cir. 2005) 2 L.W. ex rel. Whitson v. Knox County Bd. of Educ. 36 M

HERE ARE NO MATERIAL FACTS IN DISPUTE 17 CONCLUSION 18 ii EFTA00728010 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Altemosc Constr. Co. v. Building & Constr. Trades Council 443 F. Supp. 489 (E.D. Pa. 1977) 19 Apicella v. McNeil Labs. Inc. 66 F.R.D. 78 (E.D.N.Y. 1975) 4 Mel v. Murphy, 70 F.R.D. 651 (D.R.I. 1976) 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x IN RE APPLICATION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS TO DAILY NEWS, L.P., AND GEORGE RUSH x No. 10 M8-85 (LLM) REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DAILY NEWS, L.P., AND DAILY NEWS JOURNALIST GEORGE RUSH IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO QUASH SUBP

nt of Justice 413 F.3d 53 (D.C. Cir. 2005) 2 L.W. ex rel. Whitson v. Knox County Bd. of Educ. 36 M

HERE ARE NO MATERIAL FACTS IN DISPUTE 17 CONCLUSION 18 ii EFTA00207333 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Altemosc Constr. Co. v. Building & Constr. Trades Council 443 F. Supp. 489 (E.D. Pa. 1977) 19 Apicella v. McNeil Labs. Inc. 66 F.R.D. 78 (E.D.N.Y. 1975) 4 Mel v. Murphy, 70 F.R.D. 651 (D.R.I. 1976) 5

on: DAILY NEWS, L.P. Anne B. Carroll (AC-5322) Deputy General Counsel 450 West 33"I Street, 3n° Floor 10001 Attorneys for Daily News, L.P. and George Rush A copy was also sent via first-claim mail to Jack Alan Goldberger ATfERBURY GOLDBERG & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 FL 33

00729036 TABLE OF AUTHORMES Cases Doe No. 102 v. Epstein, No. 9:09-CV-80656-KAM (S. D. FIa. 2009) 4 Altemose Constr. Cot v. Building & Constr. Trades Council, 443 F. Supp. 489 (ED. Pa. 1977) 7 Flores v. Cooper Tire and Rubber Co., 178P.Id 1176, 1183 (Ariz. App. 2008) Ulrich v. Coast Dental Services. In

and indispensable party. See, e.g., Hon. William W. Schwarzer et al., Federal Civil Procedure Before

e-charge model does not raise 'serious constitutional problems," there is no issue. Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Florida Gulf Coast Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council. 485 U.S. 568. 575. 108 S. Ct. 1392. 1397. 99 L.Ed.2d 645 (1988)). But I do not believe the text is so clear, and—as I discuss below—I believe the