Appeal in my motion. And I understand 22 Mr. Edwards intends to rely upon it. But iS this was an authored decision by Judge 24 Melanie May from the Fourth DCA. And that 25 case has great language to guide this Court 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 20 21 22 23 24 IS 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 f

00617917 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Schwartzle versus Publix Super Markets is a case in which the appellate court, the Fourth DCA, was asked to address the issue of the inclusion of a confidentiality provision in a proposal for settlement. What that opinion says is -- and thi

in's Motion to Stay, and states: In their motion, Defendant asks the Court to stay it mg on the production of the NPA agreement pending review by the Fourth DCA. Since this NPA was never properly sealed in the first place, a Stay is improper because this document is a public record until such time as it has

in's Motion to Stay, and states: In their motion, Defendant asks the Court to stay it mg on the production of the NPA agreement pending review by the Fourth DCA. Since this NPA was never properly sealed in the first place, a Stay is improper because this document is a public record until such time as it has

se Fifth Amendment questions that were asked of my client -- THE COURT: No probative value. MS. ROCKENBACH: No probative value. And the Frazier -- the Fourth DCA says that even that adverse inference against parties when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them. If my c

n's Motion to Stay, and states: In their motion, Defendant asks the Court to stay it. P mg on the production of the NM agreement pending review by the Fourth DCA. Since this NM was never properly sealed in the first place, a Stay is improper because this document is a public record until such time as it has