5
Shared Docs
5
Same-Page
18 / 5
Mentions
80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80119, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for Protective Order and Objection to Disclosure of Certain Documents (D.E. #214). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part
intiffs were provided in the underlying Doe I. Epstein case. Specifically, the Joint Stipulation provides that Counsel for Jane Doe and Counsel for Epstein disagree whether certain correspondence, defined by the parties as "correspondence and documents (including content thereof) between Epstein's atto
-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related cases: 08-80232, 0
t Complaint procedure (and in connection with this procedure disseminate the material to the media), and in a pending state court proceeding styled Epsteinil. Edwards, No. 502009 CA040800XXXXMB AG, that Epstein initiated against Plaintiffs' Counsel Edwards, among others, alleging a conspiracy to use Epst
FTA00206521 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 226 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2011 Page 3 of 6 inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Florida Rules of Evidence. Counsel for Plaintiffs, for their part, argued the State Court is in the best position to determine whether the evidence is admissible in the stat
80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80119, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for Protective Order and Objection to Disclosure of Certain Documents (D.E. #214). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part
intiffs were provided in the underlying Doe I. Epstein case. Specifically, the Joint Stipulation provides that Counsel for Jane Doe and Counsel for Epstein disagree whether certain correspondence, defined by the parties as "correspondence and documents (including content thereof) between Epstein's atto
-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related cases: 08-80232, 0
t Complaint procedure (and in connection with this procedure disseminate the material to the media), and in a pending state court proceeding styled Epsteinil. Edwards, No. 502009 CA040800XXXXMB AG, that Epstein initiated against Plaintiffs' Counsel Edwards, among others, alleging a conspiracy to use Epst
FTA00212194 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 226 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2011 Page 3 of 6 inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Florida Rules of Evidence. Counsel for Plaintiffs, for their part, argued the State Court is in the best position to determine whether the evidence is admissible in the stat
80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80119, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for Protective Order and Objection to Disclosure of Certain Documents (D.E. #214). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part
intiffs were provided in the underlying Doe I. Epstein case. Specifically, the Joint Stipulation provides that Counsel for Jane Doe and Counsel for Epstein disagree whether certain correspondence, defined by the parties as "correspondence and documents (including content thereof) between Epstein's atto
-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related cases: 08-80232, 0
t Complaint procedure (and in connection with this procedure disseminate the material to the media), and in a pending state court proceeding styled Epsteinil. Edwards, No. 502009 CA040800XXXXMB AG, that Epstein initiated against Plaintiffs' Counsel Edwards, among others, alleging a conspiracy to use Epst
FTA00222322 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 226 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2011 Page 3 of 6 inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Florida Rules of Evidence. Counsel for Plaintiffs, for their part, argued the State Court is in the best position to determine whether the evidence is admissible in the stat
80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80119, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for Protective Order and Objection to Disclosure of Certain Documents (D.E. #214). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part
ure efforts of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs' counsel to disclose or make public certain discovery that Plaintiffs were provided in the underlying Doe v. Epstein case. Specifically, the Joint Stipulation provides that Counsel for Jane Doe and Counsel for Epstein disagree whether certain correspondence, defin
-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related cases: 08-80232, 0
TA00612477 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 226 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2011 Page 3 of 6 inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Florida Rules of Evidence. Counsel for Plaintiffs, for their part, argued the State Court is in the best position to determine whether the evidence is admissible in the stat
80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80119, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for Protective Order and Objection to Disclosure of Certain Documents (D.E. #214). For the following reasons said Motion is granted in part
ure efforts of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs' counsel to disclose or make public certain discovery that Plaintiffs were provided in the underlying Doe v. Epstein case. Specifically, the Joint Stipulation provides that Counsel for Jane Doe and Counsel for Epstein disagree whether certain correspondence, defin
-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related cases: 08-80232, 0
TA00615538 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 226 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2011 Page 3 of 6 inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Florida Rules of Evidence. Counsel for Plaintiffs, for their part, argued the State Court is in the best position to determine whether the evidence is admissible in the stat
Entities connected to both Jeffrey Epstein and the Florida Rules of Evidence

Bradley Edwards
PERSONJane Doe
PERSON
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION
Kenneth Marra
PERSON
Scarlett Johansson
PERSONScott Rothstein
PERSON
the United States District Court
ORGANIZATIONChambers
PERSONJANE DOE NO
PERSOND.E.
ORGANIZATIONthe State Court
ORGANIZATIONLINNEA
ORGANIZATIONJustice Department Complaint
ORGANIZATIONChmielarz
PERSONthe Final Judgment
ORGANIZATIONthe Internal Justice Department
ORGANIZATIONR. JOHN
PERSONSee American Disability Assn.
ORGANIZATIONEpstein I. Rothstein
PERSONinternal Justice Department Proceeding
ORGANIZATION