Epstein Secrets

- incrimination or losing the civil case in [summary proceedings]”). The cases relied upon by Defendant are consistent with these authorities. In Ventura v. Brosky, 2006 WL 3392207 (S.D. Fla. 2006), the Court stated the rule that a stay is warranted to avoid a situation “where a defendant in both cri

e his privilege against self-incrimination or to lose the civil case in summary or default judgment proceedings.” Id. at *1. Moreover, the stay in Ventura was granted on motion of the defendant Miami-Dade County Police Department because it would be prejudiced by its codefendant, a former police offic

emaining silent for fear of self incrimination in a parallel criminal proceeding does not rise to the level of an unconstitutional infringement.”2 Shell Oil, 866 F.Supp. at 540. Accordingly, the Defendant’s right to silence is not a basis to stay the civil case pending resolution of a criminal action.

- incrimination or losing the civil case in [summary proceedings]”). The cases relied upon by Defendant are consistent with these authorities. In Ventura v. Brosky, 2006 WL 3392207 (S.D. Fla. 2006), the Court stated the rule that a stay is warranted to avoid a situation “where a defendant in both cri

e his privilege against self-incrimination or to lose the civil case in summary or default judgment proceedings.” Id. at *1. Moreover, the stay in Ventura was granted on motion of the defendant Miami-Dade County Police Department because it would be prejudiced by its codefendant, a former police offic

emaining silent for fear of self incrimination in a parallel criminal proceeding does not rise to the level of an unconstitutional infringement.”2 Shell Oil, 866 F.Supp. at 540. Accordingly, the Defendant’s right to silence is not a basis to stay the civil case pending resolution of a criminal action.

lf- incrimination or losing the civil case in [summary proceedings]"). The cases relied upon by Defendant are consistent with these authorities. In. Ventura v. Brosky 2006 WL 3392207 (S.D. Fla. 2006), the Court stated the rule that a stay is warranted to avoid a situation "where a defendant in both crim

e Doe. 'In this regard, The Defendant's silence by invoking the Fifth Amendment does not prohibit adverse inferences against him in the civil case. Shell Oil. 866 F.Supp. at 40. - 3 - EFTA00201248 Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 64-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/24/2009 Page 4 of 13 Case 9:08-cv-80381

elf- incrimination or losing the civil case in [summary proceedings]"). The cases relied upon by Defendant are consistent with these authorities. In Ventura Brosky, 2006 WL 3392207 (S.D. Ha. 2006), the Court stated the rule that a stay is warranted to avoid a situation "where a defendant in both crimina

e Doe. 'In this regard, The Defendant's silence by invoking the Fifth Amendment does not prohibit adverse inferences against him in the civil case. Shell Oil, 866 F.Supp. at 40. - 3 - EFTA00222588 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 82 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2009 Page 4 of 9 defendant's right aga