Epstein Secrets

xpenses, deposition related costs, expert costs, etc.) that were incurred by_ysiu in the representation of you and/or your law firm in representing Jane Doe, M. and E.W. prior to joining RRA. ANSWER: Objection, relevance, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is

nt), make Epstein's request for information about such expenditures, as well as the rationale for engaging in same, relevant. See also Behm v. Cape Lumber Co., 834 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (stating that proper discovery includes records and information that are relevant to the calculation of damages.

expenses, deposition related costs, expert costs, etc.) that were incurred by you in the representation of you and/or your law firm in representing Jane Doe, L.M. and E.W. prior to joining RRA. ANSWER: Objection, relevance, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and

nt), make Epstein's request for information about such expenditures, as well as the rationale for engaging in same, relevant. See also Behm v. Cape Lumber Co., 834 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (stating that proper discovery includes records and information that are relevant to the calculation of damages.

expenses, deposition related costs, expert costs, etc.) that were incurred by you in the representation of you and/or your law firm in representing Jane Doe, L.M. and E.W. prior to joining RRA. ANSWER: Objection, relevance, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and

nt), make Epstein's request for information about such expenditures, as well as the rationale for engaging in same, relevant. See also Behm v. Cape Lumber Co., 834 So. 2d 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (stating that proper discovery includes records and information that are relevant to the calculation of damages.