Renz v. Beeman

holding that antagonistic defenses do not require the granting of severance even when one defendant takes the stand and blames his co-defendant for the crime | explaining that co-defendants' interests need not be compatible in all respects, but the statements for which protection is sought must be made "for a common purpose related to both defenses.” | “[tjhere is nothing in Brady or Agurs to require that such disclosures be made before trial” | joinder did not result in exclusion or admission of evidence or making of any argument that would not have been excludable, admissible, or made in separate trial | under New York law, plaintiff may assert equitable estoppel against defendant if fraudulent statements of defendants actually conceal from plaintiff “facts essential to make out the cause of action” | specifically noting the privilege applies to investigators | desk calendar-appointment diaries admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 803(6)