Epstein August 3, 2012 Discovery Hearing Notes Introduction: On May 7, 2012 this Court granted Epstein's Motion to Compel and Ordered Edwards to file a more complete privilege log within thirty (30) days. To date, no such log has been provided. On April 10, 2012, this Court also entered an Order on a separate Motion and Ordered Edwards to provide several communications or file a privilege log. The discovery was not completely responded to, and to date no privilege log has been provided. Accordingly, Epstein requests that this Court find that Edwards waived any alleged privileges he was claiming, and award sanctions. The failure to supply a privilege log that complies with Florida law results in the waiver of a privilege under Florida law. TIG Ins. Corp. v. Johnson, 799 So. 2d 339, 341 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("Any failure to comply with these directions will result in a finding that the plaintiff-discovery opponents have failed to meet their burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege."). The TIG court noted that Rule 1.280 "uses mandatory language, and federal courts have found waiver where the federal rule was violated." Id. This is the case cited by this Court in its Order. Specifics from the Original Motion to Compel re: Privilege Log: First, Edwards' log made one hundred and ninety-one (191) attempts to shield documents from or to an unnamed "confidential source," especially for documents described as "Litigation Strategy." Second, Edwards' log provided approximately one hundred (100) log entries in the "to" and "from" categories of the generic terms "attorney and staff," "litigation," "RRA personnel," and "unknown staff attorneys at RRA." Third, Edwards' privilege log fails to indicate whether the documents were copied or distributed to third parties, or whether blind copies were sent to third parties, which the Special Master specifically required long before the Court issued its Order. Fourth, the privilege log fails to indic