Epstein Secrets

AL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING PROCEEDINGS DATE TAKEN: Monday, January 27, 2014 TIME: 3:00 p.m. - 4:23 p.m. PLACE: Palm Bea

had no knowledge whatsoever 4 that a separate and independent action had been 5 brought by Mr. Epstein against the Rothstein 6 entities and Mr. Edwards. So to that extent, I 7 just to want let you know, as you probably already 8 did already know, that I handled those cases I 9 believe to their

ikewise commented that 19 the litigation privilege would not bar a malicious 20 prosecution claim. I have cited you to the 21 decision of Judge Corrigan in North Star Capital 22 Acquisition, LLC vs. Krig, 611 F.Supp.2d 1324 23 (M.D. Fla. 2009), another decision that was 24 decided after Levin an

me highflying societies in Manhattan and Palm Beach - socialized together in the past." Another report from The Daily Caller (7/8, News, 716K) says Bradley Edwards, a lawyer who represented Epstein's victims, "stated in court documents that Trump had barred Epstein" from Mar-A-Lago "because Epstein sexually as

The Daily Caller (7/8, News, 716K) says Bradley Edwards, a lawyer who represented Epstein's victims, "st

ty under Section 702." The report also "criticized NSA's data system security plans, which `are often inaccurate and/or incomplete." NextGov (7/8, Corrigan) reports auditors also found the agency "held onto some of that data for longer than the law permits and failed to implement protections against ins

t Lauderdale, FL 33301 ttorneys or e rey pstein Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHR

rclaim and Supporting Memorandum of Law, based on the law of the case doctrine. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In the Fourth Amended Counterclaim, Edwards raised two claims against Epstein: 1) abuse of process and 2) malicious prosecution. As to the malicious prosecution claim, Edwards alleged that th

ourts have likewise commented that the litigation privilege would not bar a malicious prosecution claim. I have cited you to the decision of Judge Corrigan in North Star Capital Acquisition, LLC vs. Krig, 611 F.Supp.2d 1324 (M.D. Fla. 2009), another decision that was decided after Levin and Echevarria