Epstein Secrets

ed, it does not appear that an analogous argument was made in any of the state court cases relied upon by Defendant. Furthermore, the discovery in Balas v. Russo, 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) was far narrower than that which is at issue here. It was limited to asking plaintiffs for their employ

z . 9 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 94 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2009 Page 9 of 10 SERVICE 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]

ording of the conduct which was the subject of the complaint, and a description of her damages. 703 So.2d 1077-78. At no time were the plaintiffs in Balas asked to disclose their entire sexually history beginning at age 10. Id. Thus, the three state court cases cited in the Motion are not helpful to t

owitz -8- EFTA00222169 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 93 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2009 Page 9 of 9 SERVICE 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

d 6 EFTA00222176 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 94 Entered on FLSD Docket 05)06:2009 Page 7 of 10 1077-78. At no time were the plaintiffs in Balas asked to disclose their entire sexually history beginning at age 10. Id. Thus, the three state court cases cited in the Motion are not helpful to t

witz 9 EFTA00222179 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 94 Entered on FLSD Docket 05'06'2009 Page 10 of 10 SERVICE 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

bpoenas on medical doctors is a basic discovery need related to the claims alleged by JANE DOE for which Plaintiff's counsel refuses to compromise. Balas v. Ruzzo 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998)(discoverability of Plaintiff's history of sexual activity is rel

, 492 F.Supp.2d 1186, 1188 (N.D. Cal. 2007), (emphasis added). 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 "merely provides a cause of action for damages in 'any appropriate United States District Court." Id, at 1189. In Tilton v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc 554 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir. Jan. 15, 2009), the District Court granted plaintiff "the min