Epstein Secrets

Motion To Identify Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Mr. Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys and

IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 502008CA037319XXXXMB AB Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. Defendant Epstein's Motion For Sanctions Against Spencer Kuvin, Esq. , Motion For Protective Order And Alternative Motion To Ide

ICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 502008CA037319XXXXMB AB Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. Defendant Epstein's Motion For Sanctions Against Spencer Kuvin, Esq. , Motion For Protective Order And Alternative Motion To Identify Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("M

laintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. Defendant Epstein's Motion For Sanctions Against Spencer Kuvin, Es

CASE NO. 502008CA037319XXXXMB AB Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. Defendant Epstein's Mo

roper manner, and to protect the court from acts obstructing the administration of justice." Levin, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Maves & Mitchell, P.A. v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 639 So.2d 606, 608-09 (Fla. 1994). Most recently, the Supreme Court in Bitterman v. Bitterman, 714 So.2d 356, 365 (Fla. 1998), recognized the inhe

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

efendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff. / PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF BRADLEY J. EDWARDS' SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION IN LIMINE ADDRESSING SCOPE OF ADMISSIBLE EVI

FF BRADLEY J. EDWARDS' SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION IN LIMINE ADDRESSING SCOPE OF ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), opposes Defendant/Counter- Plaintiff Bradley J. Edwards' ("Edwards") December 11, 2017, Second Supplement to Motion in Limine Addressing Scope of

itigation privilege and it could serve as a basis for probable cause to bring a claim. Levin, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Thomas, Mayes & Mitchell, P.A. v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 639 So. 2d 606, 608 (Fla. 1994). Epstein's Complaints identified numerous instances of conduct by Edwards that were outside the parameters of the

Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG VS. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF BRADLEY EDWARDS' COUNTERCLAIM AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW Plaintiff/Counter-Defend

DGMENT ON DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF BRADLEY EDWARDS' COUNTERCLAIM AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), by and through his undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 1.510 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, files this Motion for Summary Judgmen

CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Complex Litigation, Fla. R. Civ. Pro. 1

icial Statements, et al. proceeding if the act "has some relation to the proceeding." Levin, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Thomas, Mayes & Mitchell, P.A. v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 639 So. 2d 606, 608 (Fla. 1994). The litigation privilege bars Edwards' claim against Epstein because the filing of a complaint by Epstein has "so