Epstein Secrets

; West's F.S.A. §§ 772.014, 796.09; West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1280(b)(1). *1076 Richard E. Johnson and Heather Fisher Lind- say, of Spriggs a Johnson, Tallahassee, for Peti- tioners. Mark S. Peters of Amari, Theriac & Esenmenger, P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. W. SHARP. Judge. Bales and Shumate petition this

compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexu- al history. We decline to issue the writ of certiorari. Balas and Shumate filed suit against Ruzzo and Ex- ec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." Ac- cording to Balas and Shumate, The Boardroom op- erates ostensibly as *1077 a leisure spa but

writ of certiorari to review certain portions of the lower court's order which granted, in part, a motion to compel discovery filed by respondents Ruzzo and Exec., Inc. Petitioners argue that those portions de- part from the essential requirements of law and will cause them irreparable harm because

West's F.S.A. §§ 772.014, 796.09; West's F.S.A. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). *1076 Richard E. Johnson and Heather Fisher Lind- say, of Spriggs & Johnson, Tallahassee, for Peti- tioners. Mark S. Peters of Amari, Theriac & Eisenmenger, P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. W. SHARP, Judge. Batas and Shumate petition thi

writ of certiorari to review certain portions of the lower court's order which granted, in part, a motion to compel discovery filed by respondents Ruzzo and Exec., Inc. Petitioners argue that those portions de- part from the essential requirements of law and will cause them irreparable harm because

compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexu- al history. We decline to issue the writ of certiorari. Bales and Shumate filed suit against Ruzzo and Ex- ec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." Ac- cording to Batas and Shumate, The Boardroom op- erates ostensibly as *1077 a leisure spa but

our departure, the victim was given a copy of her subpoena for the Grand Jury which was scheduled to commence April 18, 2006. Upon our return from Tallahassee, I notified the State Attorney's Office of what was told to me. I also notified them that the subpoenas were delivered to the witnesses and they wo

, prostitutes who sued a house of prostitution (as an "enterprise") for inflicting systematic and repetitive abuse on them, over time. See Bala: v. Ruzzo, 703 So. 2d 1076, 1077 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (offering an example of a civil RICO claim against the operators of an alleged "house of prostitution,"