Epstein Secrets

efendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff. / PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EDWARDS' MOTION TO BE PERMITTED TO TAKE HIS LIMITED DEPOSITION Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") r

ability and/or Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege and Attorney Work Product With Regard to Sealed Documents. Until that Motion is resolved by this 2Epstein disagrees that the documents are privileged, but the documents and disc have been sealed and are currently the subject of a request for an in camera

ockenbach • Rachel J. Glasser (FBN Primary: Primary: Primary: Secondary: Secondary: Secondary: Trial Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jay Epstein 8 EFTA00808693 SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola Karen E. Terry David P. Vitale, Jr. Searcy, Denny, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, 2139 Palm Beach Lak

UNTY, FLORIDA Case No. 50-2009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT

already represented to the Court that other than Mr. Epstein and his co-counsel, that there have been no eyes

he Motion on behalf of Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, M., and then joined the Motion individually. For purposes of this Motion, Fanner Jaffee and Edwards shall be collectively referred to as "Edwards." 4A copy of the April 13, 2018, Bankruptcy Court hearing transcript is attached as Exhib

issing Edwards Fistos & Lehrman, Bradley J. Edwards and Intervenors L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe, voluntarily dismiss their Motions for Contempt against Jeffrey Epstein with prejudice and all causes of action which have or could have been asserted in this action and all claims for all forms of damages, including co

compensatory damages, sanctions, punitive damages, prejudgment interest, costs and attorneys' fees. Farmer Jaffe, Edwards, L.M., E.W., Jane Doe and Epstein will each bear their own attorneys' fees and costs. Dated: , 2018. Respectfully submitted, EDWARDS POTTINGER LLC Bradley J. Edwards FLBN Britt

arily dismiss their Motions for Contempt against Jeffrey Epstein with prejudice and all causes of action

ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, P.A., CHAPTER 11 Debtor. NOTICE OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, Movants, Fanner Jaffee Weissing Edwards Fistos & Lehrman, Bradley J. Edwards and Intervenors L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe, voluntarily dismiss their Motions for Contempt again

UIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION AG CASE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMB Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs. PLAINTIFF'

aintiffs. PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT EDWARDS' RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff, Jeffrey Epstein ("Plaintiff" or "Epstein"), hereby files the following Response in Opposition to Defendant Bradley J. Edwards' ("Edwards") Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion") an

SE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMB Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT

e Plaintiff agreed to pay the cost of making physical copies of the documents on the compact disks for the purpose of making it more convenient for Fanner Jaffee to prepare the privilege log (A: 13). Even though Farmer Jaffee had received one compact disk on October 19, 2010 and received another compact disk