Epstein Secrets

l by way of memorandum, and that will be done under seal and will continue to be under seal, and will be filed under seal in case of Ringer v. King Pest Control, 401 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1981). 2 EFTA00808705 a need for appellate review. So that is going to be the direction of the Court, that the motion be

ils), Edwards clearly waived any work-product protection he may have had by — among other compelling reasons -- his complete failure to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(6). With Epstein's citation in his motion to the Fourth District Court of Appeal's controlling case of General Motors Corp v. Mc

Link & Rockenbach, PA discovered documents that were voluntarily produced years ago by Edwards to his potential adversaries at the 6Binger v. King Pest Control, 401 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1981). 3 EFTA00794279 time — the Razorback plaintiffs. These e-mails directly contradict Edwards' sworn testimony and pos

ivilege log that this Court's predecessor, The Honorable David Crow, found to be insufficient on its face and not-compliant with the requirements of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(5)7 and TIG Ins. Corp. v. Johnson, 799 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Edwards has claimed that none of the documents on the dis

that any substantive discussion of those emails will be done under seal by way of memorandum, and that will be done under seal and 'Binger v. King Pest Control, 401 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1981). 2Excerpts of the November 2, 2018, Hearing Transcript are attached as Exhibit A. 2 EFTA00794299 will continue to b

ils), Edwards clearly waived any work-product protection he may have had by — among other compelling reasons -- his complete failure to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(6). With Epstein's citation in his motion to the Fourth District Court of Appeal's controlling case of General Motors Corp v. Mc