Epstein Secrets

T OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN. Plaintiff(s), vs. SCOTT ROTIISTEIN. individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and EL, individually. Dcfendant(s). EXHIBIT b ORDER ON MOTION TO RECONFIRM EXISTING PRETRIAL D

s Motion to Amend Exhibit List. was not at issue as a result of Epstein's own dilatory conduct in failing to know what pleading was pending against Rothstein and failing to know whether a default had been entered. At the hearing on March 8, 2018, Epstein's trial counsel nonetheless repeatedly claimed tha

tein's Motion to Amend Exhibit List. McKenzie v. Prince, 718 So. 2d 394, 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (citing Binger). As the Fourth DCA aptly stated in Tomlinson-McKenzie: The objecting party is prejudiced by the admission of such evidence if the party might have taken some action to protect itself had it had timely

OURT 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 individually, Defendant, RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S RENEWED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO DI

Summary of Action' in the Complaint, which includes the following allegations: Attorney Scott Rothstein aided by other lawyers . . . at the firm of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Adler, 5., for personal greed and enrichment, in betrayal of the ethical, legal and fiduciary duties to their own clients and profe

n Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Response in Opposition to Epstein's Renewed Motion for Leave to Disclose Expert Witness "expert" testimony. See Tomlinson-McKenzie v. Prince, 718 So. 2d 394, 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) ("There was no finding that appellants failed to comply with the pretrial order in bad faith. Th

out of millions of dollars, claims of outrageous sums of money were made on behalf of alleged victims across the board. And the only way -- in fact, Scott Rothstein sits in jail. And what I've read in the paper, claims that I've settled cases for $200-million, which is totally not true. She has made claims of

Edwards, creating -- excuse me -- creating fraudulent cases of a sexually charged nature in which the U.S. Attorney has already charged the firm of Rothstein, a firm of which Bradley Edwards is a partner, was a partner, with creating, EFTA00582822 fabricating malicious cases of a sexual nature, includi

her through a proper motion or at trial, so that this Court can properly examine the issue and rule on Edwards's request that it be precluded. See Tomlinson-McKenzie v. Prince, 718 So. 2d 394, 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Aguila-Rojas v. City Management Group Corp., 606 So.2d 765, 766 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). In the case