Rule of Evidence 408 and Beyond, 12 Rev.Litig. 665, 681-82 (1993). 19 . The Oklahoma Dispute Resolution Act is discussed in Kerwin, supra note 18, at 681. 20 . Of course, the fact that a state recognizes a privilege does not lead inexorably to the conclusion that federal law would adopt the same privilege. As the Fifth Circuit has stated, "[t]hat the courts of a particular state would recognize a given privilege will not often of itself justify a federal court in applying that privilege.” American Civil Liberties Union, 638 F.2d at 1343. Federal courts in fact have declined to recognize certain state privileges. See, e.g., Hancock, 967 F.2d at 467 (declining to recognize psychiatrist-patient privilege provided by Georgia law); United States v. One Parcel of Prop., 930 F.2d at 141 (<HOLDING>); Coastal Fuels of P.R., Inc. v. Caribbean
holding that the inadvertent disclosure of a privileged document does not waive the attorneyclient privilege if attorney took all reasonable steps to avoid disclosure and asserted the privilege as soon as the disclosure became known holding that state law protecting disclosure of erased arrest records would not be recognized as federal privilege holding that 5 usc  301 does not grant authority to assert an evidentiary privilege not recognized by the federal rules of civil procedure or the law of evidence recognizing the statelaw privilege because there was no federal claim to which the records sought would be relevant holding that ferpa and state law did not create an educational records privilege