Epstein Secrets

Epstein. This Court has already ruled that everything post Link & Rockenbach is not a violation of the November 2010 Agreed Order but, rather, is a State Court issue, and will not be considered at the Show Cause hearing. Therefore, there is no further live testimony that can be elicited from Epstein that wo

J. Quinney College of Law at the Utah University of Doe Peter E. Shapiro Shapiro Law uite 3000 ounse or ., . . an ane Doe Counsel for L.M., E.W. and Jane Niall T. McLachlan Carlton Fields Jorden Burt P.A. 200 °rinse or ow er nr e urnett, P.A. Isaac M. Marcushamer Ber er Sin erman LLP C

Epstein. This Court has already ruled that everything post Link & Rockenbach is not a violation of the November 2010 Agreed Order but, rather, is a State Court issue. Therefore, there is no further live testimony that can be elicited from Epstein that would benefit the Court in deciding if Epstein violated

nse or armer a e, eissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of h Counsel for L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe Peter E. Shapiro Sha.iro Law Counsel for L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe Niall T. McLachlan Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A. Isaac M. Marc

ese show cause proceedings were instituted shortly thereafter. A privilege determination has never been made and that issue is currently before the State Court. The only issue for this Court to decide on October 26, 2018, is if Fowler White and/or Epstein violated the November 2010 Agreed Order. 2Jeffrey E

or armer affe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah Counsel for L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe Peter E. Shapiro Counsel for L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe Niall T. McLachlan Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A. Isaac M. Marcushamer Coun

Epstein. This Court has already ruled that everything post Link & Rockenbach is not a violation of the November 2010 Agreed Order but, rather, is a State Court issue, and will not be considered at the Show Cause hearing. Therefore, there is no further live testimony that can be elicited from Epstein that wo

man, P.L. Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the Utah University of Doe Peter E. Shapiro Sha iro Law uite 3000 Counsel for L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe Counsel for L.M., E.W. and Jane Niall T. McLachlan Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A. 200 ounse or ow er ite urnett, P.A. Isaac M.

osenfeld! Adler, P.A., in which the following were statements made by William Scherer, Razorback's counsel: • "[I]n November we filed a lawsuit in State Court and we alleged that as part of Mr. Rothstein and the firm, and the firm's employees, and maybe some of the firm's attorneys, conspired to use the E

ls are attorney-client privileged communications between Edwards (or any other co-counsel) and Edwards' and Mr. Cassell's three tort clients (L.M., E.W. or Jane Doe). Rather, the majority of the documents are e- mails among attorneys and staff within RRA, with Mr. Cassell, and with media sources and d