Epstein Secrets

n's state court change of plea hearing was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. D.E. 403-19 at 21, 1 38. AUSA Villafafia called attorney Edwards, told him of the June 30, 2008 hearing, and stressed the importance of the hearing.2 Thus, the government provided petitioners with notice of the ti

800037 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 427 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/10/2017 Page 31 of 32 Attorneys for Intervenor Jeffrey Epstein SERVICE LIST Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, ■. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac

D.E. 403-19 at 21, 1 38. AUSA Villafafia called attorney Edwards, told him of the June 30, 2008 hearing, and stres

uestion of law to be decided by this Court. "Statutory interpretation is a matter of law appropriate for resolution on summary judgment." Thomas v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 631 F.3d 1153, 1160 (10th Cir. 2011)(citation omitted). "Issues of statutory interpretation and other matters of law may be decided on motion for su

n's state court change of plea hearing was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. D.E. 403-19 at 21, 1 38. AUSA Villafafia called attorney Edwards, told him of the June 30, 2008 hearing, and stressed the importance of the hearing.2 Thus, the government provided petitioners with notice of the ti

tant United States Attorney 30 EFTA00800005 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 425-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/06/2017 Page 32 of 33 SERVICE LIST Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice S.J. Quinney College of

D.E. 403-19 at 21, 1 38. AUSA Villafafia called attorney Edwards, told him of the June 30, 2008 hearing, and stres

uestion of law to be decided by this Court. "Statutory interpretation is a matter of law appropriate for resolution on summary judgment." Thomas v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 631 F.3d 1153, 1160 (10th Cir. 2011)(citation omitted). "Issues of statutory interpretation and other matters of law may be decided on motion for su

occurs in the United States." Burnett II, 292 F.Supp2d at 19 n. 4 (quoting Tel-Oven v. Libyan Arab Republic, 726 F.24 774, 775 (D.C.Cir.1984)) (Edwards, J., concurring) (some emphasis omitted). Courts in the Second Circuit seem to take the opposite approach. "Although cast in terms that may be re

cludes the relevant period in this action and five preceding years. See In re Magnetic Au- diotape Antitrust Litig., 334 F.3d at 207- 08; see also, Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 84 F.3d at 569-70 (holding that the time peri- od relevant for determining extent of a defendant's contacts for general jurisdic- tion purpose sho