…185 A.D.2d 268, 269 (N.Y.A.D.,1992) (Inspector General's investigative files regarding incident in correctional facility not discoverable by inmate). 5 In her first Motion to Compel (DE 75), Defendant wholly fails to make any…
…TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.......................................................................................................... ii I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ............................................................................................1 II. LEGAL ARGUMENT ........................................................................…
…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…
…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 . …
…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…
…experience prong, the Second Circuit has held that “the notion of public access to judicial documents is a capacious one: the courts of this country have long recognized a general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including…
…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…
…a)(1). Plaintiff touted to this Court her “thousands of pages” produced in response to the discovery requests, but upon closer inspection, that production is essentially empty: it consists largely of numerous copies of lengthy transcripts, and defendant’s pleadings…
…Norfolk S. Corp., 228 F.R.D. 426, 432 (W.D.N.Y. 2004) (“generalized objections that discovery requests are vague, overly broad, or unduly burdensome are not acceptable, and will be overruled.”). Therefore, this Court should require Defendant to…
…up the investigation was to prepare for contemplated legal proceedings, it would not be appropriate to order inspection of the documents on the ground that the defendants had not satisfied the burden of proof. The affidavits did not disclose G …
…v. Kent State Univ., No. 5:08 CV 720, 2012 WL 6084630, at **3-4 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 6, 2012) ................................................................................................................... 9 Generac Power Sys. v. Kohler Co., 2012 WL 5463913, at *2 (E.D. Wis. Nov. 8, 2012) .. 9…
…18, 2014) .................................4 ii USP Strategies v. London General Holdings Ltd., [2004] EWHC 373 (Ch) ..........................................................................................................5, 6 Waugh v. British Railways Board, …
…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…
…Maxwell, has failed to comply with Local Rule 26.2(a)(2)(B), which requires that “the general subject matter of the communication” be stated in the privilege log. The “subject matter” is not stated; it does not even indicate…
…“[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…
…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…
…17, 2024 notices of appeal in this case untimely by several years. Maxwell Br. at 14–18. We are not persuaded. Appellate jurisdiction generally exists only over the “final decisions of the district courts,” 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and…