Epstein Secrets

in's motion to present the probable cause issue. (App. 30). In his Motion to Strike, Edwards assumes positions that are completely at odds with 3 Tonja Haddad. P.A. • 315 SE 7th Street, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301. EFTA00808561 his positions taken in the Fourth District Court of Appeal. He now argues that

that a copy of the foregoing was served upon all parties listed on the attached service list, via electronic service, this September 28, 2017. /s/ Tonja Haddad Coleman Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 0176737 315 S.E. 7th Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 8 EFTA00808566 SERVICE LIST Jack Sc

regoing was served upon all parties listed on the attached service list, via electronic service, this September 28, 2017. /s/ Tonja Haddad Coleman Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 0176737 315 S.E. 7th Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 8 EFTA00808566 SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola, Es . Searcy De

argument as to probable cause for this Court's consideration. See Nat'l City Bank v. Accent Marketing Assoc., supra. Edwards argues that Gabor v. Gabor & Co., Inc., 599 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) "is directly on point." See Edwards's Motion to Strike, p. 5. However, the Gabor case is clearly distingui

CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was served upon all parties listed below via electronic service this September 28, 2017. 9 EFTA00808557 Is/ Tonja Haddad Coleman Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 0176737 315 S.E. 7th Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 IM SERVICE LIST 10 EFTA00808558

the foregoing was served upon all parties listed below via electronic service this September 28, 2017. 9 EFTA00808557 Is/ Tonja Haddad Coleman Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 0176737 315 S.E. 7th Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 IM SERVICE LIST 10 EFTA00808558

e argument as to probable cause for this Court's consideration. See Nat'l City Bank v. Accent Marketing Assoc., supra. Edwards argues that Gabor v. Gabor & Co., Inc., 599 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) "is directly on point." Motion to Strike at 5. Gabor is clearly distinguishable. In that case, the Third D

r Scott Rothstein Jack Goldberger, Esq. ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 S. Australian Ave., Ste. 1400 O1 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. TONJA HADDAD, P.A. 5315 SE 7th Street., Ste. 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 ttorneys or e rey pstein Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. FARMER, JAFF

f material fact as to probable cause; thus, consideration of this issue by this Court again is precluded by the law of the case doctrine. Gabor v. Gabor & Co., Inc., 599 So.2d 737, 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), is directly on point. In Gabor, the appellate court held that there was a genuine issue of material fa