Epstein Secrets

EENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. CASE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMB JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, -VS- SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs. DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF BRADLEY EDWARDS' MOTION TO STRIKE

URLINGTON Florida Bar No. 285862 By:/s/ Nichole J. Segal NICHOLE J. SEGAL Florida Bar No. 41232 /kbt 6 EFTA00613506 SERVICE LIST Epstein v. Rothstein/Edwards Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMB W. Chester Brewer, Jr., Esq. W. CHESTER BREWER, JR., P.A. 250 S. Australian Ave., Ste. 1400 West Palm Beac

dismiss), rev. denied, 81 So. 3d 414 (Fla. 2012). STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS In December 2009, Appellee, Jeffrey Epstein, filed suit against Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Appellant, Bradley J. Edwards, based upon Epstein's justifiable belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individu

er trial court decision applying the litigation privilege to a malicious prosecution claim. This decision is on appeal to this Court and is set for Oral Argument on April 28, 2015. 10 EFTA00613599 Florida Supreme Court cases germane to the issues. In Wolfe, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the

ied, 81 So. 3d 414 (Fla. 2012). STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS In December 2009, Appellee, Jeffrey Epstein, filed suit against Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Appellant, Bradley J. Edwards, based upon Epstein's justifiable belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and ot

dismiss), rev. denied, 81 So. 3d 414 (Fla. 2012). STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS In December 2009, Appellee, Jeffrey Epstein, filed suit against Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Appellant, Bradley J. Edwards, based upon Epstein's justifiable belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individu

er trial court decision applying the litigation privilege to a malicious prosecution claim. This decision is on appeal to this Court and is set for Oral Argument on April 28, 2015. 10 EFTA00589630 and Echevarria. See Brief, pp. 11-26. Wolfe is directly on point with the facts and law presented in the case

dismiss), rev. denied, 81 So. 3d 414 (Fla. 2012). STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS In December 2009, Appellee, Jeffrey Epstein, filed suit against Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Appellant, Bradley J. Edwards, based upon Epstein's justifiable belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individu

ied, 81 So. 3d 414 (Fla. 2012). STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS In December 2009, Appellee, Jeffrey Epstein, filed suit against Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Appellant, Bradley J. Edwards, based upon Epstein's justifiable belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and ot

er trial court decision applying the litigation privilege to a malicious prosecution claim. This decision is on appeal to this Court and is set for Oral Argument on April 28, 2015. 10 EFTA00714933 Florida Supreme Court cases germane to the issues. In Wolfe, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the

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

its 3/29/18 0.20 150.00 Order regarding trial; (2) denying Petitioner's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees and Costs; (3) denying request for Oral Argument; (4) denying respondent's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees; and (5) denying Petitioner's Motion for Rehearing of denial of Petitioner's Motion

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

its 3/29/18 0.20 150.00 Order regarding trial; (2) denying Petitioner's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees and Costs; (3) denying request for Oral Argument; (4) denying respondent's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees; and (5) denying Petitioner's Motion for Rehearing of denial of Petitioner's Motion

Trial Exhibits 7.50 0.00 03/03/18 SJL Work on Response to Motion to B. Edwards' Compel re Request for Admissions; strategize re default against S. Rothstein and options to proceed with trial or seek to strike trial setting; work on preparations for special set hearings; work on trial preparations 7.30

ocket re stz 03/15/18 SJL Wt C issell's Motion for Pro H; on Reply to B. Edwards' .tition for Writ of kii, r ; with clients re si . • for Oral Argument; fo o disc 03/15/18 KBR Le . • ti ce/foreign rule and al '' ;; vepare/revise order (st nix Aural defect) of re . C ssell's pro hac vice