Epstein Secrets

odhurst Orseck Josefsberg et al. City National Bank Building 25 W Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 3 Telephone: Fax: Attorneys for Plaintiff Jane Doe 101 EFTA00728152 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 9:09-CV-80591-KAM Jane Doe 101, Plaintiff, vs. Jeffrey E

he bars of the State of Connecticut and District of Columbia, and is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, the United States Courts of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Seventh Circuit, Ninth Circuit, District of Columbia Circuit, and Federal Circuit, and the United States District Court for

ng position against interlocutory appeals under Perlman will support our motion to dismiss Epstein's appeal here. Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 EFTA00209341 Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. Quinncy College of Law at the Univer

he Justice Department has long sought to give a narrow construction to Perlman. Indeed, it is our understanding that the Justice Department in other Courts of Appeals outside the Eleventh Circuit has argued that Mohawk implicitly narrows Perlman substantially. Perlman is most commonly used by criminals who are ta

0000 Importance: Normal You will have seen Epstein's latest (and belated) motion for limited prospective intervention. We are writing on behalf of Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 to invoke their right to confer on this motion with the Government. We would like to know your position on the motion. Please let

he Justice Department has long sought to give a narrow construction to Perlman. Indeed, it is our understanding that the Justice Department in other Courts of Appeals outside the Eleventh Circuit has argued that Mohawk implicitly narrows Perlman substantially. Penman is most commonly used by criminals who are tar