…materials in this way. Moreover, these improper redactions are in derogation of the “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents,” that has long been recognized by the Supreme Court. See Nixon v…
…Additionally, Plaintiffs' counsel have identified approximately four boxes of documents that they have offered to make available to Dershowitz's counsel for inspection. vAs of today's date Plaintiffs have produced all documents which are properly subject to discovery in…
…Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2213 (2018) (holding that an “official intrusion into [the] private sphere generally qualifies as a search and requires a warrant supported by probable cause”). “[A] compulsory production of . . . private books and papers . …
…Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, 814 F.3d 132, 142 (2d Cir. 2016) (“The courts have long recognized the “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.”) (citing Nixon, 435 U.S. at 597…
…121 (2d Cir. 2006). We observe that our holding in Lugosch relies on the general principle that parties may “be assumed to have supported their papers with admissible evidence and non‐ frivolous arguments.” Id. at 122. Insofar as a district…
…For example, the right prohibiting the government from obtaining heat wave information from within one's home by way of sense- enhancing technology not in general public use arises from notions of privacy rooted in Fourth Amendment jurisprudenc e, see…
…presumptively subject to public inspection") (internal quotation marks omitted); Bernsten v. O'Reilly, No. 17 CIV. 9483 (DAB), 2018 WL 1615840, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 3, 2018) ("There is a long-established general presumption in favor of…
…Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, 814 F.3d 132, 142 (2d Cir. 2016) (“The courts have long recognized the “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.”) (citing Nixon, 435 U.S. at 597…
…121 (2d Cir. 2006). We observe that our holding in Lugosch relies on the general principle that parties may “be assumed to have supported their papers with admissible evidence and non‐ frivolous arguments.” Id. at 122. Insofar as a district…
…121 (2d Cir. 2006). We observe that our holding in Lugosch relies on the general principle that parties may “be assumed to have supported their papers with admissible evidence and non‐ frivolous arguments.” Id. at 122. Insofar as a district…
…LLP, 814 F.3d 132, 142 (2d Cir. 2016). In Bernstein, the Second Circuit emphasized the "general right to inspect and copy…judicial records and documents." Id. at 142 (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S…
…“[c]ourts generally apply one of three standards when faced with a request to modify a protective order. The Martindell standard is generally applicable when a government agency seeks modification of a protective order governing discovery in a civil action…
…Yet, with this second batch of documents, Ms. Maxwell offers only the same repackaged generalized arguments, which this Court and the Second Circuit have already rejected as insufficient to support the continued sealing of documents in this matter. Giuffre, 827…
…121 (2d Cir. 2006). We observe that our holding in Lugosch relies on the general principle that parties may “be assumed to have supported their papers with admissible evidence and non‐ frivolous arguments.” Id. at 122. Insofar as a district…
…158 (1945) (“Moreover, we are not prepared to concede that the general right of inspection of public records enables one in every instance to publish such records broadcast without regard to the truth of defamatory matter contained in them.”). Here…
…court. It holds “that when a court has ruled on an issue, that decision should generally be adhered to by that court in subsequent stages in the same case,” unless “cogent” and “compelling” reasons militate otherwise. United States v. Quintieri…
…discovery materials deemed inadmissible at trial, holding that “disclosure of such [materials] would play a negative role in the functioning of the criminal process, by exposing the public generally, as well as potential jurors, to incriminating evidence that the law…
…Moreover, “[i]t is the clear law of this Circuit that civil docket sheets “enjoy a presumption of openness and that the public and the media possess a qualified First Amendment right to inspect them.” Bernstein v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger…
…Devonshires Solicitors LLP and registration number 619881. This Firm does not accept service by electronic mail or facsimile. A list of members is open to inspection at the address below. Devonshires Solicitors, 30 Finsbury Circus, London EC2M 7DT tel +44 …
…Devonshires Solicitors LLP and registration number 619881. This Firm does not accept service by electronic mail or facsimile. A list of members is open to inspection at the address below. Devonshires Solicitors, 30 Finsbury Circus, London EC2M 7DT tel +44 …
Comments