Epstein Secrets

has carefully considered all of these filings and the entire record in this action, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. I. BACKGROUND' Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein"), the central figure in a criminal action brought by the United States of America regarding fraudulent activities undertaken by Rothste

idered all of these filings and the entire record in this action, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. I. BACKGROUND' Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein"), the central figure in a criminal action brought by the United States of America regarding fraudulent activities undertaken by Rothstein while he

nding in federal and state courts. These parties previously had filed motions to depose Rothstein in the RRA bankruptcy proceeding, resulting in the Bankruptcy Court certifying its order to this Court for its approval, as Rothstein is currently serving a sentence imposed by this Court in Case No. 09.60331-CR. Be

: Yes, sir. THE COURT: What happened to that? MR. LINK: So, that action was dismissed in 2012. Mr. Epstein still has a pending action against Mr. Rothstein, but the action against Mr. Edwards was dismissed in 2012, and Mr. Edwards filed a THE COURT: As a claim in the Rothstein OUELLETTE & MAULDIN COUR

o --- THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Link. MR. PUGATCH: Okay. MR. LINK: You're welcome, your Honor. MR. PUGATCH: So, we come back to why we're here in Bankruptcy Court, Judge. We're here in Bankruptcy Court because they brought a petition for order to show cause why there should not be contempt and sanctions agai

e-mail to M. Nurik re setting UMC hearing on S. Rothstein's Motion to 4.80 1,080.00 Dismiss; prepare Not

prepare for and attend status conference hearing; follow up with J. Epstein and D. Indyke re same; review Court's Order following hearing; work on Bankruptcy Court strategies; work on Motion to Compel B. Edwards to identify Bates numbers of documents produced; work on Motion re filing certified copy of V. Rob

re same; follow up on setting UMC hearing on S. Rothstein's Motion to Dismiss; work on hearing folder; pre

es of procedure re objecting to notice in preparation for drafting motion for protective order re B. Edwards' Notice of J. Epstein's Deposition in Bankruptcy Court 06/18/18 RJG Research elements of abuse of process cause of action to include in Response to S. Rothstein's Motion to Dismiss 06/18/18 TLC Work

ail in Farmer Jaffe's underlying motion [DE 6326] and joined by Mr. Edwards [DE 6325], Epstein sued one of his own child victims, L.M., Edwards, and Rothstein alleging that each had committed a series of criminal acts against him and caused him damages. The lawsuit read as a whole was intended to convey t

ssue to whether privilege was properly invoked in the creation of the privilege log over seven years ago. That is certainly not an issue before the Bankruptcy Court. At this stage, the parties were about to start trial when Epstein mysteriously started listing as trial exhibits emails that are listed on the Febr

re same; follow up on setting UMC hearing on S. Rothstein's Motion to Dismiss; work on hearing folder; pre

es of procedure re objecting to notice in preparation for drafting motion for protective order re B. Edwards' Notice of J. Epstein's Deposition in Bankruptcy Court 06/18/18 RJG Research elements of abuse of process cause of action to include in Response to S. Rothstein's Motion to Dismiss 06/18/18 TLC Work