Epstein Secrets

OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXX MB AG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff(s), vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendant(s). / PROCEEDINGS HELD BEFORE JUDGE DONALD HAFELE PLAINTIF

B AG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff(s), vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually,

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 today? MR. SCAROLA: I would only note, your Honor, as is reflected on the Certificate of Service, in my communications with Miss Haddad I mentioned four law firms representing Mr. Epstein. There are in fact five law firms representing Mr. Epst

Edwards's Counterclaim. In support thereof, Epstein states as follows: FACTS Epstein originally filed this action to recover damages from Defendant Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Edwards, based upon Epstein's well-founded belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and other unknow

aim. In support thereof, Epstein states as follows: FACTS Epstein originally filed this action to recover damages from Defendant Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Edwards, based upon Epstein's well-founded belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and other unknown partners,

nd every purported abuse of process occurred, Edwards again replied: "the - 5 - EFTA00612154 date of service of each of the above as reflected on the Certificate of Service of each." See Answers to Interrogatories filed June 10, 2011. Edwards has not pointed to, and indeed cannot point to, one act either outside of or

November 2009, the press reported that the law firm Conrad Scherer filed a Complaint against Rothstein and others, Razorback Funding. LLC, a at v. Scott W. Rothstein, a at, Case No. 09-062943(19) (hereinafter the "Razorback Complaint"), on behalf of some of the Ponzi scheme investors. The Razorback Complaint all

diation scheduled before you on October 11, 2013, and states: I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY In December 2009, Epstein filed suit against Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Bradley J. Edwards ("Edwards"), based upon Epstein's well-founded belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and

tes upon which each and every purported abuse of process occurred, Edwards again replied: "the date of service of each of the above as reflected on the Certificate of Service of each." Accordingly, Edwards has not pointed to, and indeed cannot point to, one act either outside of or extrinsic to the litigation, undeniably

November 2009, the press reported that the law firm Conrad Scherer filed a Complaint against Rothstein and others, Razorback Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et at, Case No. 09-062943(19) (hereinafter the "Razorback Complaint"), on behalf of some of the Ponzi scheme investors. The Razorback Complaint al

diation scheduled before you on October 11, 2013, and states: I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY In December 2009, Epstein filed suit against Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and Bradley J. Edwards ("Edwards"), based upon Epstein's well-founded belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and

tes upon which each and every purported abuse of process occurred, Edwards again replied: "the date of service of each of the above as reflected on the Certificate of Service of each." Accordingly, Edwards has not pointed to, and indeed cannot point to, one act either outside of or extrinsic to the litigation, undeniably