Epstein Secrets

Rothstein. For example, Epstein alleges generally that "Edwards's... actions constitute a fraud upon Epstein as [Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, and Adler], [Scott] Rothstein and the Litigation Team represented themselves to be acting in good faith and with the best interests of their clients in mind at all times when in

the Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler law firm ("RRA") where Edwards worked for a short period of time). Epstein appears to allege that Edwards joined and Rothstein in fabricating sexual assault cases against Epstein to "pump" the cases to Ponzi scheme investors. As described by Epstein, investor victims were t

ction may not invoke the fifth amendment and refuse to comply with the defendant's discovery requests, thereby thwarting the defendant's defenses." Rollins Burdick Hunter of New York Inc. v. Euroclassic Limited, Inc., 502 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3"I Dist. Court App. 1983). Here, Epstein is trying to do precisely what the "w

URT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800)OOOCMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendant, RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFRE

OOCMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually,

ent. 994 So. 2d at 478. Moreover, "[a] civil litigant's fifth amendment right to avoid self-incrimination may be used as a shield but not a sword." Rollins Burdick Hunter of New York, Inc. v. Euroclassics Ltd., Inc., 502 So. 2d 959, 962 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Thus, "where the party claiming a Fifth Amendment privilege i

ifferent litigation in which he himself — not Jane Doc — is a party. Specifically, in January 2010 the managing partner of Edwards' former law firm, Scott Rothstein, pled guilty and was sentenced to 50 years in prison for a massive "Ponzi" scheme in which he defrauded investors of $1.2 billion by convincing the

brought a civil lawsuit against Edwards in Florida state court in which he alleges that Edwards was involved in, or knew or should have known about, Rothstein's Ponzi scheme, and pleads claims against Edwards for fraud and violation of Florida's racketeering statute as well as an abuse of process claim al

o. Nov. 12, 1992) 24, 26 People v. Royster, 43 .U1758, 842 ad 12 (1st Dep't 2007) 26 Pugh v. Avis Rent A 1997 WL 669876 ( Oct. 28, 1997) 27 Rollins Burdick Hunter of N. Y., Inc. v. Euroclassics Ltd., 502 So.2d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) 21 Russman v. Bd. of Ed., 260 F.3d 114 (2d Cir. 2001) 13 S&I Inve

CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, Vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendant, / DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAIN

laint he carries forth the essence of all claims asserted in his original Complaint. In that pleading Epstein essentially alleges that Edwards joined Rothstein in the abusive prosecution of sexual assault cases against Epstein to “pump” the cases to Ponzi scheme investors. The purported “proof” of the allega

action may not invoke the fifth amendment and refuse to comply with the defendant’s discovery requests, thereby thwarting the defendant’s defenses.” Rollins Burdick Hunter of New York, Inc. v. Euroclassic Limited, Inc., 502 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).. For the same reasons, Epstein should be precluded from advancing

Rothstein falsely informed the investors that the potential settlement agreements were available for purchase. Plea Agreement at 2, United States v. Scott W. Rothstein, No. 9-60331-CR-COHN (S.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2010) attached hereto as Exhibit “SS.” 87. It has been alleged that among other cases that Rothstein used t