Epstein Secrets

ction may not invoke the fifth amendment and refuse to comply with the defendant's discovery requests, thereby thwarting the defendant's defenses." Rollins Burdick Hunter of New York Inc. v. Euroclassic Limited, Inc., 502 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3"I Dist. Court App. 1983). Here, Epstein is trying to do precisely what the "w

ired to prove harm. See, e.g., Bortell v. White Mountains Ins. Group, Ltd., 2 So.3d 1041, 1047 (Fla. 4th Dist. Ct. App. 2009); S & I Investments v. Payless Flea Market, Inc., 36 So.3d 909, 917 (Fla. 4'h Dist. Ct. App. 2010). Epstein was not harmed by Rothstein's misrepresentations to other people that he knew nothing abo

o. Nov. 12, 1992) 24, 26 People v. Royster, 43 .U1758, 842 ad 12 (1st Dep't 2007) 26 Pugh v. Avis Rent A 1997 WL 669876 ( Oct. 28, 1997) 27 Rollins Burdick Hunter of N. Y., Inc. v. Euroclassics Ltd., 502 So.2d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) 21 Russman v. Bd. of Ed., 260 F.3d 114 (2d Cir. 2001) 13 S&I Inve

Inc. v. Euroclassics Ltd., 502 So.2d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) 21 Russman v. Bd. of Ed., 260 F.3d 114 (2d Cir. 2001) 13 S&I Investments v. Payless Flea Market, Inc., 36 So.3d 909 (Fla. Dig. Ct. App. 2010) 18 Saxton v. Arkansas Gazette Co., 264 Ark. 133 (1978) 29 Smith v. Moore, 31 III3d 628, 818 2d 603 (2

plaintiff suffered damage.” S & I Investments v. Payless Flea Market, Inc., 36 So.3d 909, 917 (Fla, 4" Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

action may not invoke the fifth amendment and refuse to comply with the defendant’s discovery requests, thereby thwarting the defendant’s defenses.” Rollins Burdick Hunter of New York, Inc. v. Euroclassic Limited, Inc., 502 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).. For the same reasons, Epstein should be precluded from advancing