Epstein Secrets

rivilege. On the contrary, as the court found in Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Wigand No. 101678/

United States v. Treacv 19 603 F. Supp. 2d 670 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) STATUTES N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 79-h 3 OTHER 9 James Wm. Moore et al.. Moore's Federal Practice (3d ed. 2010) II EFTA00728013 Daily News, L.P. ("Daily News"), and Daily News journalist George Rush respectfully submit this reply memorandum o

rivilege. On the contrary, as the court found in Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Wigand No. 101678/

United States v. Treacv 19 603 F. Supp. 2d 670 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) STATUTES N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 79-h 3 OTHER 9 James Wm. Moore et al.. Moore's Federal Practice (3d ed. 2010) II EFTA00207336 Daily News, L.P. ("Daily News"), and Daily News journalist George Rush respectfully submit this reply memorandum o

trict court originally denied class certification for both claims, and this Court reversed. See Brown v. Nucor Corp., 576 F.3d 149 (4th Cir. 2009) ("Brown I"). For internal use only SDNY_GM_00056815 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R.ctON(F IDENTIAL DB-SDNY-00 19639 EFTA_00 167385 EFTA01295652 Pa

ed his own contractual duties. Pub. Serv. Enter. Grp., Inc. v. Philadelphia Elec. Ca, 722 F. Supp. 184, 219 (D.N.J. 1989) (citing 5 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 1235 at 189-90). In other words, "when pleading a claim for the breach of an express contract . . . the complaint must contain som

ilable to vindicate a federal right); Bruschi v. Brown, 876 F.2d 1526, 1531 (11th Cir. 1989) (taking "s

r, as the CVRA requires, she filed a petition for writ of mandamus. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3): see also 16 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 3932 (3d ed. 2019) (explaining that a mandamus petition is "an original application to the court of appeals"). The question before

g trafficking offenses may properly be required to disclose the details of their personal finances as a condition of *1222 supervised release. See Brown, 402 F.3d at 137(affirming financial disclosure condition imposed on defendant convicted of drug trafficking in part because "given this particula

2'C F dering a hearing or in the scope or dura- tion of a stay can be corrected by courts of appeals through the issuance of man- damus. 6 Moore, Federal Practice, 9 54.10 [4], at 87 (2d ed. 1955). Here. however, appellant has of requested 1 such relief, see Zamore Goldblatt, 2 Cir., 1953. 201 F.2d 738,

umption In favor of public access to the courts. Brown I. Advantage Engineer- The doctrine of ancillary

ax Labs., Inc. . Twin Laboratories Inc., 183 F. .D. 458, 463, n. 8 (D.Md.1998); 8 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Richard L. Marcus, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil 2d § 2023 at 335 (2d ed.1994)(work product materi- als are not beyond the scope of dis- covery on grounds of "privilege"). FN

. See e.g., United States'. Young. 528 F.3d 1294, 1297 n.3 (11th Cir. 2008) (definitions of criminal "complaint" and "indictment"); United States'. Brown. 526 F.3d 691, 705 (11th Cir. 2008) (definition of "knowingly" in criminal statute). A Westlaw search revealed that in 2008 alone, the Ekvtnth Circu

d as a factual allegation"). Factual allegations naist be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and EFTA00175635 Case 9:08-cv-i„ .19-KAM Docuri, 146 Enterer, ...i FLSD Docket 10i„,2008 Page 4 of 10 Case No. CV-80119-Marra-Johnson Page No