Interlocutory Order Denying Intervenors’ Motion for Protective Order is Appealable
Appellate team leader John Bunyan and Tyler Wetzel wrote an article on the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Doe No. 1 v. United States. Below is an excerpt from “Interlocutory Order Denying Intervenors’ Motion for Protective Order is Appealable,” originally featured in the American Bar Association’s May 1, 2014 Appellate Practice newsletter:
The litigation arose out of an agreement by the United States not to file any federal charges against Jeffrey Epstein in exchange for his offer to plead guilty to state offenses. Two of Epstein’s victims filed petitions alleging that the United States had violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771, and sought rescission of the non-prosecution agreement. The victims moved the district court to compel the United States to produce documents relating to the plea negotiations. Epstein and his criminal-defense attorneys moved to intervene to challenge the disclosure and use of the plea negotiations, which the district court granted, and moved for protective orders based on several privileges. The district court denied the intervenors’ motions for protective orders, required the United States to produce correspondence between it and Epstein’s attorneys, and granted the victims the right to proffer this correspondence. The intervenors filed an interlocutory appeal, which the victims moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.