This document is page 10 of a deposition transcript, likely from September 29, 2010. Attorney Mr. Tein questions a redacted deponent, represented by attorney Mr. Leopold, about their awareness of a lawsuit filed on their behalf by lawyer Jeffrey Herman. Mr. Leopold objects to the question, citing attorney-client privilege, leading to a dispute over the validity of the privilege claim.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MR. TEIN | Attorney |
Attorney conducting the deposition, asking questions of the deponent.
|
| MR. LEOPOLD | Attorney |
Attorney representing the deponent, making objections and asserting attorney-client privilege.
|
| THE COURT REPORTER | Court Reporter |
Confirmed that the deposition was being recorded.
|
| Jeffrey Herman | Lawyer |
Mentioned as a lawyer who allegedly filed a lawsuit on behalf of the deponent.
|
| [REDACTED] | Deponent |
The individual being questioned in the deposition. Their name is redacted on line 10.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| HOUSE_OVERSIGHT |
Appears in the footer of the document (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012405), likely indicating the U.S. House of Representatives O...
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
An 'attorney from Miami' is mentioned, whose conversations are claimed to be protected by attorney-client privilege.
|
"You were supposed to be here this morning and you totally broke the deal, the agreement that you had with us if your hearing got cancelled."Source
"are you aware that a lawyer named Jeffrey Herman filed a lawsuit on your behalf, yes or no?"Source
"Objection. ... It's attorney/client privilege, as well as any conversations you may have had with the attorney from Miami. That is also attorney/client privilege."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,216 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document