Epstein Secrets

The case law is also enclosed. id your Honor have any questions or concerns regarding the foregoing, please contact th 'gned's office. V ours, Critton, Jr. Enclosures cc. Spencer Kuvin, Esq. (via facsimile w/o enclosures) Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. (via facsimile w/o enclosures) • PHONE: • PAX:

paid, this day ofe 1 2-CO9 to Jack A Goldberger, Esq., 250 Australian Avenue, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach, FL 334101; Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq., MO Robert D. Critton, Jr., Michael J. Pike, LEOPOLD-KUVIN, P.A. 1.1 M1 (561) 5 facsimile) •••••...1 By: ENCER KUVIN, Esq. Florida Bar No.: 0089737 ADAM J. LANGINO,

ied and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity." In re Morganroth, 718 F.2d 161, 166-67 (6th Cir. 1983). In making this determination the judge is instructed to view the facts and evidence presented on a case- by-c

E LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. [email protected] Robert D. Critton, Esq. [email protected] s/ Adam D. Horowitz - 16 - Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 57 Entered

ied and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the Court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity.” In re Morganroth, 718 F.2d 161, 166-167 (6th Cir. 1983)

02/2009 Page 16 of 16 SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Jack Alan Goldberger Es . Robert D. Critton, Esq. s/ Adam D. Horowitz -16- EFTA00728216 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 57-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES

fied and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the Court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity." In re Morganroth, 718 F.2d 161, 166-167 (6th Cir. 1983) Accordingly, Plaintiff deviates where necessary from the format set forth in S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(H)(2) in the

2/2009 Page 16 of 16 SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Jack Alan Goldber er, Es . Robert D. Critton, Esq. s/ Adam D. Horowitz -16- EFTA00222517

fied and to require him to answer if it clearly appears to the Court that the witness asserting the privilege is mistaken as to its validity." In re Morganroth, 718 F.2d 161, 166-167 (6th Cir. 1983) Accordingly, Plaintiff deviates where necessary from the format set forth in S.D.Fla.L.R. 26.1(H)(2) in the