EFTA01130803Set 9
2016-03-3010p3,662w
jurisdiction to consider the plaintiff's claims. Lujan
25 v. Defenders of Wildlife 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992).
26
2 The court notes, however, that at the hearing, plaintiffs' counsel
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01130803.pdf
EFTA00805348Set 9
2018-11-2819p5,376w
Superior Court,
478 U.S. 1 (1986) 11
Richmond Newspaper& Inc. v. Virginia,
448 U.S. 555 (1980) 12, 13
Constitutions
U.S. Const. amend. I 11
N.Y. State Const ... accept what they are prohibited from observing." Richmond
Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 572 (1980). "Only a free and unrestrained press can
effectively expose deception in government
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00805348.pdf
EFTA00596701Set 9
2017-01-1917p4,739w
Cohen,
733 F.2d 1059 (3d Cir. 1984) 5
Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia,
448 U.S. 555 (1980) 4, 5, 6
Rushford v. New Yorker Magazine, Inc.,
846 F.2d ... Supp. 2d 528, 531 2008)
(citing Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 580 n.17 (1980)); see also hi. at 599
(Stewart, J., concurring); and see Maryland v. Baltimore Radio
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00596701.pdf
EFTA01091403Set 9
2009-04-3074p36,721w
Superior Court, 457
U.S. 596, 606.07 (1982); Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 564, 581
(1980); Estes v. Texas, 381 U.S. 532 (1965); 28 C.F.R. § 50.9. Victims
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01091403.pdf
EFTA01125545Set 9
2009-03-1515p7,691w
Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596, 606-07 (1982); Richmond
Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 564, 581 (1980); Estes v. Texas, 381 U.S.
532 (1965); 28 C.F.R
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01125545.pdf
EFTA00092308Set 9
2019-03-0626p5,904w
Norfolk Cty., 457 U.S. 596, 606
(1982)).
49Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 572-73 (1980) (plurality
opinion) (internal quotation marks omitted).
so Amodeo II, 71 F.3d
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00092308.pdf
EFTA00806757Set 9
2018-11-2656p13,446w
Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper
Co., 282 U.S. 555, 563 (1931).
Maslenjak v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1918, 1929 (2017) citing Bigelow v. RICO Radio Pictures
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00806757.pdf
EFTA00085098Set 9
2019-03-0618p7,254w
also Kelly v. Albarino, 49 Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555,
485 F.3d 664, 666 (2d Cir. 2007) (adopting the 572-73, 100 S.Q. 2814, 65 L.Ed
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00085098.pdf
EFTA00805407Set 9
2018-04-0621p5,804w
Supp. 2d 528, 531 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (citing
Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 580 n.17 (1980)). Recently, the Second Circuit
reiterated the common law presumption in Bernstein v. Bernstein
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00805407.pdf
EFTA00792797Set 9
2017-08-1013p3,261w
Supp. 3d 510, 517 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (quoting Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561
(1992)). In light of these requirements, this Court has refused to allow one litigant
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00792797.pdf
EFTA00812537Set 9
2013-06-1914p4,270w
case-or-
controversy requirement of Article III." Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560, 112 S.
Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). To satisfy Article
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00812537.pdf
EFTA00591894Set 9
2013-06-1914p4,270w
case-or-
controversy requirement of Article III." Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560, 112 S.
Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). To satisfy Article
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00591894.pdf
EFTA01081519Set 9
2013-06-1914p4,270w
case-or-
controversy requirement of Article III." Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560, 112 S.
Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). To satisfy Article
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01081519.pdf