Epstein Secrets

D SERVICE LIST M.J. v. Epstein Case No. 9:10-cv-81111-WPD United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards Fistos & Lehrman, PL Telephone: Facsimile: Attorneys for Plaintiff M.J. Served via CMIECF -14- EFTA00725489

proof of service from Mr. Marsigliano attesting that he left M.J.'s complaint with the caretaker at Epstein's residence or usual place of abode." (D.E. 15 at p. II). This assertion is false. Defendant has never admitted that the proof of service states that Mr. Marsigliano left the Summons and Com

copy of her complaint and other documents with someone at the home", which is all that Plaintiff alleges, or whether Mr. Epstein had actual notice (D.E. 15 at 12), but, rather, whether the suit papers were left with "someone of suitable age and discretion who resides" at 9 East 71s' Street, New York.

United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah Attorneys for Jane Doe # I and J

n letter to me. This was the first written communication I had received from the FBI. The letter was attached as Exhibit 1 to my earlier statement." D.E. 310- 1, 1 34. Exhibit 1 to her earlier statement of January 19, 2015 (D.E. 291-1), is the notification letter from the United States Attorney's Offi

on June 30, 2008, in the Circuit Court for Palm Beach County to various similar state offenses including solicitation of minors for prostitution." D.E. 1,1 2. Once they received the non-prosecution Jane Doe No. 3, who seeks to be added as a party, also wasted little time in utilizing the non- prosec

of March, 2010: Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Brad Edwards, Esq. Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, PL ounse or ant in e a e ase No. 084089-3 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice EFTA00207708 Case 9:08-cv

retrial motions by the parties is March 5, 2010. This action is currently set for trial on the two week calendar commencing Monday, July 16, 2010. [D.E. 119]. Thus, in order to comply with the Court's order, Defendant is filing the subject motion now. As stated above, Defendant requests and reserves

vised in the premises, the Court finds as follows. EFTA00793957 Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6366 Filed 04/20/18 Page 2 of 8 I. ALLEGATIONS Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fixtos & Lehrman, P.L. ("Farmer Jaffe") filed the Motion for Order to Show Cause [D.E. 6326] alleging that the attorneys at the

urt orders or rules, or to prevent an abuse of process. The Court has jurisdiction here because the Court retained jurisdiction in the Agreed Order [D.E. 1194], and this alleged discovery violation is a core proceeding. See 28 U.S.C. § 157 ("Core proceedings include, but are not limited to (A) matter

manner specified via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF on this day of November, 2010. Brad Edwards, Esq. Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman PL Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Aueroury uotaneriter K weirs, r., FOWLER WHITE BURNER, PA -8- EFTA00235284

note from a review of the docket sheet in Doe v. U.S., that Judge Marra administratively closed the cases for non-prosecution on September 9, 2010 [D.E. 39]. Please recall the undersigned pointed out in Epstein's initial motion that this case has been languishing in excess -6- FOWLER WHITE BURNETT.

has been scheduled by Special Master Carney for April 6, 2011 relating to the sufficiency of the privilege log as presently prepared by the Farmer, Jaffe firm with regard to 1500 or more Epstein related documents. Special Master Carney will perform an in camera inspection of the documents at issue du

and subsequently clarified and amended by this Court's October 15, 2010 Amended Order Respecting Production of Documents Regarding Jeffrey Epstein (D.E. #1068]. 3. The privilege log being reviewed by Special Master Carney relates to claims of privilege asserted by the Farmer, Jaffe firm on behalf