Epstein Secrets

DS' COUNTERCLAIM In December 2009, Epstein filed a lawsuit against Edwards, alleging that Edwards, his client L.M., and Edwards' then-law partner (Scott Rothstein) had abused process in bringing the lawsuit. Edwards MEI 3. Edwards answered the complaint and filed a counterclaim for essentially malicious prose

client L.M., and Edwards' then-law partner (Scott Rothstein) had abused process in bringing the lawsuit. Edw

ng waiver of "confidentiality of the corpus" of communications from a telephone call disclosing part of privilege communications); United States v. Jacobs, 117 F.3d 82, 90 (2d Cir. 1997) (finding that waiver of attorney-client privilege extended to the entirety of two letters written by Jacobs' attorne

3 Misc.2d 179, 425 N.Y.S.2d 485, (N.Y. Co. Sup. Ct. 1980) 13 People v. Osorio, 75 N.Y.2d 80, 84, 549 N.E.2d 1183 (N.Y. 1989) 10 United States v. Jacobs, 117 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 1997) 13 iii EFTA00728064 United States v. Sanusi, 813 F. Supp. 149 (E.D.N.Y. 1992) fn. 4 Statutes 18 U.S.C. § 2255

deposition to begin on December 12, 2011, granting a stay to the government. Epstein sought leave of the Bankruptcy Court to take the deposition of Scott Rothstein on December 1, 2011. At that time, Judge Ray denied the Motion without prejudice, because there was no time in the schedule to depose Mr. Rothstein.

y Edwards. The Statement of Undisputed Facts is identical to the one used for Edwards' first Motion for Summary Judgment. EFTA00808026 Epstein v. Rothstein and Edwards Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMB/Div. AG Epstein's Response in Opposition to Edwards' MSJ to obtain summary judgment. Third, Edwards has

s inadmissible when the evidence is introduced solely to prove bad character, or that the person acted in conformity with his character. See, e.g., Jacobs v. Westgate, 766 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (error to admit evidence that roommate bounced checks in action for negligent disposition of propert

NTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No. 50-2009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff. PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPO

EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individua

the notions of fair trial for the state to force a defendant to resurrect a prior defense against a crime for which the defendant is not on trial." Jacobs v. All. Coast Ref, Inc., 165 So. 3d 714 (Fla. 4`h DCA 2015) (finding that "because the prior case was settled, none of the allegations therein were

ENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, vs. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff, JUDGE: HAFELE PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S OMNI

EFTA00585430 142. All pleadings filed by Epstein in the Rothstein Bankruptcy Proceeding. 143. All submissions by Epstein in connection with the Rothstein deposition. 144. All Settlement Agreements between Epstein and victims of his sexual molestations. 145. Phone journal taken from Epstein's home a

a. 4th DCA 2009). "[E]ven if relevant, a trial court may not permit the collateral crime evidence to become an impermissible feature of the trial." Jacobs v. At!. Coast Ref, Inc., 165 So. 3d 714, 718 (Fla. 4th DCA. 2015), reh'g denied (June 9, 2015) (citing Durousseau v. State, 55 So.3d 543, 551 (Fla.