Epstein Secrets

reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. b. None. 6. All fee sharing agreements between Bradley J. Edwards, RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor relating to any aspect of any Plaintiff's case. ANSWER: Objection, relevance, not reasonably calculated to l

ent to his cause of action. Moreover, discovery relating to Edwards's financial incentives to join RRA and to engage in conduct in cooperation with Rothstein in support of RRA's illicit activities is most certainly relevant to Edward's allegations in this case and Epstein's defense of the same. Accordingl

ts that this Court enter an Order Striking Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards's ("Edwards") Objections to Epstein's Discovery Requests' and Compelling Edwards to produce documents and/or Interrogatory responses responsive to Epstein's Requests. In support thereof, Epstein states: I Them are still outstan

reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. b. None. 6. All fee sharing agreements between Bradley J. Edwards, RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor relating to any aspect of any Plaintiff's case. ANSWER: Objection, relevance, not reasonably calculated to l

ent to his cause of action. Moreover, discovery relating to Edwards's financial incentives to join RRA and to engage in conduct in cooperation with Rothstein in support of RRA's illicit activities is most certainly relevant to Edward's allegations in this case and Epstein's defense of the same. Accordingl

ts that this Court enter an Order Striking Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards's ("Edwards") Objections to Epstein's Discovery Requests' and Compelling Edwards to produce documents and/or Interrogatory responses responsive to Epstein's Requests. In support thereof, Epstein states: I Them are still outstan

reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. b. None. 6. All fee sharing agreements between Bradley J. Edwards, RRA, or Scott W. Rothstein and/or any other attorney or investor relating to any aspect of any Plaintiff's case. ANSWER: Objection, relevance, not reasonably calculated to l

nt to his causes of action. Moreover, discovery relating to Edwards's financial incentives to join RRA and to engage in conduct in cooperation with Rothstein in support of RRA's illicit activities is most certainly relevant to Edward's allegations in this case and Epstein's defense of the same. Accordingl

ts that this Court enter an Order Striking Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards's ("Edwards") Objections to Epstein's Discovery Requests' and Compelling Edwards to produce documents and/or Interrogatory responses responsive to Epstein's Requests. In support thereof, Epstein states: I Them are still outstan