[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Scientology/Wollersheim as test case for key disclosure
On Sat, 9 Sep 1995, Greg Broiles wrote:
>
> the pleadings" (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(B)). I don't see why
> Wollersheim couldn't comply with the discovery rules by providing
> plaintext copies of all relevant information, unless for some reason
> the passphrase is itself relevant.
>
Ah. but if there is no plaintext, the question is whether you comply
with the rule by providing the encrypted text rather than plaintext. I
would say you have to provide the plaintext in the absence of a legitimate
privilege claim, but I don't recall a case to this effect (there is
precedent for requiring translation of foreign language documents when
the request is covered by an evidence conention; I don't recall if there
are any such cases that fall purely under domestic US rules). Anyone have
chapter and verse?
A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Associate Professor of Law | [email protected]
U. Miami School of Law |
P.O. Box 248087 | It's hot here. And humid.
Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA |
See (soon to move to its real home): http://www.law.miami.edu/~mfroomki