Epstein Secrets

Valdes v. GAB Robins, 924 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) 7 Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, M., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2000) 2 Wolfe v. Foreman, 128 So. 3d 67 (FIa. 3d DCA 2013) passim Wright v. Yurko, 446 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) 19, 20, 21 iii EFTA00589620 PRELIMINARY STATEM

dard of review. DelMonico v. Traynor, 116 So. 3d 1205 (Fla. 2013); Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, M., 760 So. 2d 126, 130 (Fla. 2000); LaFrance v. U.S. Bank National Association, 141 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). The trial court's finding that the litigation privilege applies to malicious prosecution claims, as well as it

ldes v. GAB Robins, 924 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) 7 Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2000) 2 Wolfe v. Foreman, 128 So. 3d 67 (FIa. 3d DCA 2013) passim Wright v. Yurko, 446 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) 19, 20, 21 iii EFTA00714923 PRELIMINARY STATE

ndard of review. DelMonico v. Traynor, 116 So. 3d 1205 (Ha. 2013); Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, M., 760 So. 2d 126, 130 (Fla. 2000); LaFrance v. U.S. Bank National Association, 141 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). The trial court's finding that the litigation privilege applies to malicious prosecution claims, as well as it

issue was one for the jury. However, this Court granted summary judgment in favor of Epstein based on the litigation privilege, relying on Wolfe v. Foreman, 128 So.3d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). Accordingly, Final Judgment was entered in favor of Epstein. 2 EFTA00613502 Edwards appealed the summary judgm

ard of review. DelMonico v. Traynor, 116 So. 3d 1205 (Ha. 2013); Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126, 130 (Fla. 2000); LaFrance v. U.S. Bank National Association, 141 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). The trial court's finding that the litigation privilege applies to malicious prosecution claims, as well as it