recording was somehow protected by a journalist's privilege. Jane Doe responded, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (McKenna, J.) held a hearing and listened to the tape in camera. The district court then ruled that the tape was not protected by the journalist's privilege

y News filed a motion to quash, claiming that the tape recording is somehow protected by a journalist's privilege. In June 2010, the District Court (McKenna, J.,) rejected that argument, finding that, in view of its importance. the tape was properly discoverable despite the claim of journalist privilege

ed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1352 PRIOR HISTORY: rag Appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (McKenna, J.) denying appellants' motion for leave to amend their complaint to add additional plaintiffs, the district court having found that the claims of

ated June 23, 2010 (Stein, J.), and entered on June 25, 2010, adjudging them in civil contempt of the Memorandum and Order entered on May 21, 2010 (McKenna, J.) by reason of the Daily News Parties' refusal to consent to the production of certain newsgathering material that was ordered to be produced in

01 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: DN_Epsteinn Itr to_Hon._McKenna_5-3-10.pdf Please see the attached - thank you! «DN Epstein - kr to Hon. McKenna 5-3-10.pdf>> Steve Parker I Davis Wright Tremaine LLP Anchorage I Bellevue I Los Anodes I New York I Porasnd I San Francisco I Seattle I Shanghai I

Y 10019-6708 tel fax [email protected] Re: In re Application to Quash Subpoena to Daily News, L.P. and Rush, No. 10-M8-85 (LMM) Dear Judge McKenna: I write as counsel to non-party Daily News, L.P. and journalist Rush. They have moved to quash subpoenas for deposition testimony and documents s

nally required, or rooted in federal common law"); Persky v. Yeshiva Univ. No. 01 Civ. 4278 (LMM), 2002 WL 31769704, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 10, 2002) (McKenna. J.) ("This circuit has long recognized the existence of a qualified privilege for journalistic information. This privilege is based. at least in p

t to the ECU to find a way to pitch the idea. T reached 011t to Supervisory administrative Specialist (SAS) Arlene McKenna, who the NYFO ECU. SAS McKenna also liked my idea and stated any changes in the evidence guidelines or polity would have to come From the Field Kvidenre Eliggrem (FEP) of the F

3970112-000042 EFTA00725201 device) and a written transcript thereof (the "Transcript") to the district court judge in the Ancillary Proceeding (McKenna, J.) for in camera review; and WHEREAS, the Daily News Parties do not have in their possession a copy of the Epstein Recording; and WHEREAS, by Me

2 tel fax 1633 Broadway 10019-6708 Re: In re Application to Quash Subpoena to Daily News, L.P. and George Rush, No. 10-M8-85 (LMM) Dear Judge McKenna: I write as counsel to non-party Daily News, L.P. and journalist George Rush. They have moved to quash subpoenas for deposition testimony and docum

nally required, or rooted in federal common law"); Persky v. Yeshiva Univ. No. 01 Civ. 4278 (LMM), 2002 WL 31769704, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 10, 2002) (McKenna. J.) ("This circuit has long recognized the existence of a qualified privilege for journalistic information. This privilege is based. at least in p

Monism/ 302 3501.142-01 2020.0x15 nternew notes 3501.10-01 2019.11.01 Intones" 301 3501.10-000 2019.11.01 Intoning Notes 3501.148 eatrkk McKenna DM Dosciptkes 39)1 148 0)1 2006.11.11 Florida DAVID. indnidual summary page for Patoct McKenna 3501148 032 2006.11.11 Florida DAY.I.D.IndhIdu

- Jane Doe -- filed a proper subpoena for the tape in the U.S. District Court for the South District of New York. In June 2010, the District Court (McKenna, J.,) denied the Daily News' motion to quash the subpoena, finding that in view of its importance, the tape was properly discoverable despite the c

called Edwards' investigator and said, "My god, you've [got to] get this tape. [Epstein] talks about the girls." Fisten Aft at I 3. Similarly, Judge McKenna — who had the benefit of listening to the recording' — specifically ruled that the recording contains statements that are "of likely relevance to a

n application for recusal. 'In a separate unreported case Poe v. Epstein in which a young woman sued Epstein in connection with underage sex, Judge McKenna of the New York District Court Southern District of New York, found sufficient relevance to order the tape released, but the case was settled first

se in Opposition to Motion of Daily News, to Quash Subpoena), at 6-13) — the same exact waiver argument he makes here. The federal District Court (McKenna, J.) did not accept Edwards' waiver argument; but, instead, ruled that, since Epstein was known to be the source for the interview, he was a non- co

cKenna reserved ruLng on whether the recording will be re'eased to atierneYs representing young women who were sexually abused by Epstein as mfrors. McKenna didn't Wen to the recanting tiring the hearing. Fon Lauderdale attorney Bald Edwards and Utah allomey and low professor Paul Casten ors flghtng to

Professional Services Rendered: 03/16/2009 MJP Getting up to speed on files as per RDC and meeting with R. Critton, Esq., B. 4.40 hr $1.320.00 McKenna and R. Budnyk 03/16/2009 RHB Legal research re: 5th Amended indentification of witnesses 0.75 hr $225.00 03/16/2009 RHB Draft responses to Mo

ff4/Macintosh HD Path /Users/jee/Library/Application Support/AddressBook/AddressBook-v22.abcddb SourceType Mac AddressBook First Barbara Last McKenna Email (Work) Creation Date 2011-02-04 18:00:10 (UTC) Modification Date 2014-11-06 18:07:17 (UTC) ID 158 Contact Source Device NYCO24328.aff4/

ff4/Macintosh HD Path /Users/jee/Library/Application SupportlAddressBook/AddressBook-v22.abcddb SourceType Mac AddressBook First Barbara Last McKenna Email (Work) Creation Date 2011-02-04 18:00:10 (UTC) Modification Date 2014-11-06 18:07:17 (UTC) ID 158 Contact Source Device NYC024353.aff4/

missible at defendant's trial on hearsay grounds"); United States v. Jackson, No. 02 CR. 756 (LMM), 2006 WL 1993251, at '2 (S.D.N.Y. July 14, 2006) (McKenna, J.) ("The defendant has not shown how the subpoenaed telephone records, of their nature hearsay, could be admissible, as required by Nixon."); Bro