Epstein Secrets

Ed., §10:160, Sta a, Private Civil Actions Under ERIC% (2008); Stansfield v. Starkey, 269 Cal. Rptr.,

134 (6th Cir.1994) (finding seventeen month period insufficient to show continuity); Religious Tech. Ctr. v. Wollersheim, 971 F.2d 364, 366-67 (9th Cir.1992)( "We have found no case in which a court [of appeals] has held the [continuity] requirement to be satisfied by a pattern of activity lasting less t

oup, Charles J. Nagy, J.D., Thomas Muskus, J.D., Eric C. Surette, J.D. IV. Subjects of Protection and

d 20, the district court held a probable cause hear- ing pursuant to United States tz All Assets of Statewide Auto Pads, Inc. 971 F2d 896, 906 (2d Cir.1992) and United States v. Monsanto, 924 F2d 1186, 1203 (2d Cir.1991). On May 30, 1995, the district court vacated the seizure warrant, finding that th

oumal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006534). Opinion Journal. The Wall Street Journal (April 8, 2005). Retrieved on 2006-12-22. 26. A Lichtblau, Eric, "Report Details Archives Theft by Ex- Adviser" (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/21/washington/2lberger.html), New York Times, December 21, 2006 27.

ase r remanded on other grounds. See United States Palmer, Palmer, F.3d 760, 767 (8th Cir.2002); sited States Montana, 979 F.2d 136, 138 (8th Cir.1992); United States I Fiallo-Jacome, 874 F.2d 1479, 1481-83 (11th Cir.1989). We conclude that Mr. Carter has forfeited his *646 current ex post facto