Epstein Secrets

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg®podhurst.com kezell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

time of the underlying conduct unless there is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg®podhurst.com kezell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

time of the underlying conduct unless there is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg®podhurst.com kezell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

time of the underlying conduct unless there is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the

ert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orsecic, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Fax• 105 15R-910 Counsellor Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 FL 33401-5012 Fax• 561-R15-R691 Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey E

Fax• 105 15R-910 Counsellor Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

time of the underlying conduct unless there is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the

11 of 11 Garcia Law Firm, P.A. FL 33401 aa,bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe II v. Epstein, et al. Page 11 Isidro M. Garcia, Esq. Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 aH pens ith.net ti3ZFunsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Respectfully su

t al. Page 11 Isidro M. Garcia, Esq. Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. West P

ct at the time of the underlying conduct unless there is a clear statement that an amendment is to apply retroactively to prior conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. U.S. ex rel Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997)("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the 1986 amend

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 [email protected] kezell@podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell@podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

time of the underlying conduct unless there is a clear statement that an amendment should apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. See, e.g., Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 952 (1997) ("Given the absence of a clear statutory expression of congressional intent to apply the