Epstein Secrets

S'S MOTION FOR FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant, Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., by and through his undersigned counsel and pursu

for all claims brought against him in Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein's Complaint. Not only is there an absence of competent evidence to demonstrate that Edwards participated in any fraud against Epstein, the evidence uncontrovertibly demonstrates the propriety of every aspect of Edwards' involvement in the p

rt claims. The only cases not resolved are this case and two (2) cases in state court (all three Plaintiffs are represented by Plaintiff's counsel, Brad Edwards, Esq. and his firm). I 5. Plaintiffs in other filed cases were represented by various law firms as the court is aware. 6. With the additional disco

Hall v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40, 43 (Fla. 1966). It is not enough for the opposing party merely to assert that an issue of fact does exist. Fisel v. Wynns, 667 So.2d 761, 764 (Fla.1996); Landers v. Milton, 370 So.2d 368, 370 (F1a.1979) (same). Moreover, it is well-recognized that the non-moving party

TRUE 680, LLC KING,GIOCONDA ST EDWARDS RECTORY BELL JR,LOWRY M 375 SOUTH C

UEST,WINSTON SHULMAN,ALAN BALLINGER,WYNNE S CANTOR,IRIS QUICK,THOMAS C B

to Amended to Assert Punitive Damages; Exhibit “E” — Transcript of Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein dated January 25, 2012; Exhibit “F’ — Deposition of Bradley Edwards dated March 23, 2010; Exhibit “G” - Deposition of Scott Rothstein dated June 14, 2012; Exhibit “H” — Order of HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013305 --- PAGE BREAK

dwards Affidavit”) (Exhibit 32. On June 13, 2008, attorney Edwards agreed to represent E.W.; on July 2, 2008, tomes

ed hereto as Exhibit “LL.” Edwards Pursues Other Lines of Discover 69. Because of Epstein’s thwarting of discovery and attacks on Edwards’s clients, Bdwards was forced to pursue other avenues of discovery. Edwards only pursued legitimate discovery designed to further the cases filed against Epstein. See E