Epstein Secrets

kenbach, Esq. Rachel J. Glasser, Esq. LINK & ROCKENBACH, PA 1555 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. Ste. 301 h, Florida 33401 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. KITERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue S., Ste. 1400 West Palm Beach. FL 33401 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein 30 Marc

ida 33401 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. KITERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250

ett v. Continental Chemicals, Inc., 19 492 So.2d 724 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) Campbell v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 1 204 So.3d 476 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea 20, 21, 22 170 So.3d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) Grossman v. Fla. Power & Light Co., 14 570 So.2d 992 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) Haft v. Adam

Law Offices of Marc S. Nurik o- ounse or e en an ounter- 01 1 1 ard, Suite 700 ounse or e en ant Scott Rothstein Plaintiff Bradley J. Edwards Jack A. Goldberger WA HAND DELIVERY Atterbu , Goldber er & Weiss, P.A. The Honorable Donald W. Hafele uite 1400 Palm Beach County Courthouse 1 205 N. Dixie Highw

Rothstein Plaintiff Bradley J. Edwards Jack A. Goldberger WA HAND DELIVERY Atterbu , Goldber er & Weiss,

Schoof, 190 So. 3d 169, 170 (Ha. 5th DCA 2016) ("Strict compliance with rule 1.440 is required and failure to adhere to it is reversible error."); Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125, 131 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ("[A] party is absolutely entitled to strict conformance with the terms of rule 1.440, inclu

er LLC o- ounse or ee nt ounter-Plaintiff Bradley J. Edwards Marc S. Nurik . Nurik yard, Suite 700 01 Counsel for Defendant Scott Rothstein Jack A. Goldberger Atterbur , Goldber er & Weiss, P.A. Suite 1400 01 Co-Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein VIA U.S. MAIL ONLY The Honorable

1 Counsel for Defendant Scott Rothstein Jack A. Goldberger Atterbur , Goldber er & Weiss, P.A. Suite 1400

nscript. Epstein will supplement his Appendix with the Court's Order once entered. 7 See Bennett, 492 So. 2d at 727; Teelucksingh, 21 So. 3d at 37; Gawker Media, LLC, 170 So. 3d at 131; Genuine Pans Co., 917 So. 2d at 421. 7 EFTA00793773 The purpose of mandamus is "to enforce the respondent's unqualified

s Counsel for Defendant Scott Rothstein Jack A. Goldberger Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, 250 Australian A

also Tucker, 175 So. 3d at 306 13 EFTA00808484 (final judgment reversed because case noticed for trial before answer to counterclaim was filed); Gawker Media, LLC, 170 So. 3d at 129-30 (granting mandamus to enforce Rule 1.440 and holding that an appeal after final judgment would be insufficient to remedy

s Counsel for Defendant Scott Rothstein Jack A. Goldberger Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, . 250 Australia

ance"); Genuine Pans Co. v. Parsons, 917 So. 2d 419, 421 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)(issuing a writ of mandamus to enforce strict toning of Rule 1.440(c)); Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125, 131 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)("[A] party is absolutely entitled to strict conformance with the terms of rule 1.440, includ

y Epstein Jack A. Goldber er, Esquire Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, 250 Australian Avenue S, Suite 1400 Wes

at all of the claims or counterclaims in those cases involved the same parties that were involved in the underlying complaint. 10. For example, in Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea 170 So. 3d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015), the case primarily relied upon by Epstein, the plaintiff, Bollea, sued multiple defendants, one of

00 01 ounse or e e nt Scott Rothstein Jack A. Goldberger Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. Suite 1400

. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 204 So. 3d 476, 479 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (citing Genuine Parts Co. v. Parsons, 917 So. 2d 419, 421 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) and Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125, 130 (Ha. 2d DCA 2015)). I In compliance with this Court's Administrative Order No. 2014-1, the Petitioner has cont