Epstein Secrets

Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2009 Page 2 of 22 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.:

, which has been consolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when

nsolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls

, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. I ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents (D.E. #57). For the following reasons said 3 EFTA00728596 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 242 E

ll, LEAD ATTORNEY, Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg et al, Miami, FL USA; Robert C. Josefsberg, LEAD ATTORNEY, Podhurst Orseck, P.A., Miami, FL USA. For Jeffrey Epstein, Defendant (9:09-cv-80591-KAM): Michael James Pike, LEAD ATTORNEY, Pike & Lustig, LLP, West Palm Beach, FL; Robert Deweese Critton, Jr., LEAD ATTOR

nsolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls

ORNEY, Podhurst Orseck, P.A., Miami, FL USA. For Jeffrey Epstein, Defendant (9:09-cv-80591-KAM): Michael J

llis, Washington, DC. JUDGES: LINNEA R. JOHNSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. OPINION BY: LINNEA R. JOHNSON OPINION ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents (D.E. #57). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part and denied in part as follows.

ll, LEAD ATTORNEY, Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg et al, Miami, FL USA; Robert C. Josefsberg, LEAD ATTORNEY, Podhurst Orseck, P.A., Miami, FL USA. For Jeffrey Epstein, Defendant (9:09-cv-80591-KAM): Michael James Pike, LEAD ATTORNEY, Pike & Lustig, LLP, West Palm Beach, FL; Robert Deweese Critton, Jr., LEAD ATTOR

nsolidated for purposes of discovery, Plaintiffs are former under-age girls who allege they were sexually assaulted by Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), at his Palm Beach mansion home. The scheme is alleged to have taken place over the course of several years in or around 2004-2005, when the girls

ORNEY, Podhurst Orseck, P.A., Miami, FL USA. For Jeffrey Epstein, Defendant (9:09-cv-80591-KAM): Michael J

llis, Washington, DC. JUDGES: LINNEA R. JOHNSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. OPINION BY: LINNEA R. JOHNSON OPINION ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents (D.E. #57). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part and denied in part as follows.