Epstein Secrets

peared pro hac vice below for non-parties L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe, on a limited confidentiality issue

original jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari under Article V, section 4(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution, and under Rule 9.030(b)(3) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Ordering bifurcation where claims are inextricably woven warrants certiorari relief. See, e.g., Maris Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser—Busch, Inc., 710 So

Epstein VIA U.S. MAIL ONLY The Honorable Donald W. Hafele 18 EFTA00793747 111111111 By: /s/ Kar

as original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus under Article V, section 4(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution, and under Rule 9.030(b)(3) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Mandamus is "a proper vehicle to enforce the time restrictions for the setting of a trial under rule 1.440." Campbell v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2

urpose of joining already intervening parties "E.W." and "the Palm Beach Post" in their arguments reg

ON AGREEMENT AND ADDENDUM PENDING REVIEW Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 9.310, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, moves to stay disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement and Addendum (collectively, the "NPA") pending review, and states: 1. In the event the

Nos.2006-CF9454 AXX 2008-9381CF AXX NONPARTY E.W.'S MOTION TO VACATE ORDER SEALING RECORDS AND UNS

ON AGREEMENT AND ADDENDUM PENDING REVIEW Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 9.310, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, moves to stay disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement and Addendum (collectively, the "NPA") pending review, and states: 1. In the event the

order dated June 25, 2009 on: a) Non-party, E.W.'s Motion to Vacate Order Sealing Records and Unse

ON AGREEMENT AND ADDENDUM PENDING REVIEW Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 9.310, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, moves to stay disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement and Addendum (collectively, the "NPA") pending review, and states: 1. In the event the

of Judicial Administration 2.420(d)(5) (A-10). E.W. alleged that the proper procedures had not been

ON AGREEMENT AND ADDENDUM PENDING REVIEW Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rule 9.310, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, moves to stay disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement and Addendum (collectively, the "NPA") pending review, and states: 1. In the event the