Epstein Secrets

BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, Appellant, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Appellee. FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 4D14-2282 L.T. Case No.: 502009CA040800

e litigation privilege applies to malicious prosecution claims, as well as its finding that the litigation privilege was applicable specifically to Edwards's claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process against Epstein, constituted issues of law. DelMonico, 116 So. 3d at 1211 (stating the dete

er trial court decision applying the litigation privilege to a malicious prosecution claim. This decision is on appeal to this Court and is set for Oral Argument on April 28, 2015. 10 EFTA00589630 and Echevarria. See Brief, pp. 11-26. Wolfe is directly on point with the facts and law presented in the case

CLIENT: 0002 - Jeffrey Epstein Re: 0001 Bradley Edwards Date Services 06/01/18 TLC Work on scheduling

1555 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. Suite 930 Jeffrey Epstein 6100 Red Hook Quarter, B3 St. Thomas, USV 00802 CLIENT: 0002 - Jeffrey Epstein Re: 0001 Bradley Edwards Date Services 06/01/18 TLC Work on scheduling J. Epstein's deposition; work on dates for same; multiple communications with client, C. Pugatch,

its 3/29/18 0.20 150.00 Order regarding trial; (2) denying Petitioner's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees and Costs; (3) denying request for Oral Argument; (4) denying respondent's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees; and (5) denying Petitioner's Motion for Rehearing of denial of Petitioner's Motion

. Suite 930 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jeffrey Epstein 6100 Red Hook Quarter, 83 St. Thomas, USV 00802 CLIENT: 0002 - Jeffrey Epstein Re: 0001 Bradley Edwards Date Services 06/01/18 TLC Work on scheduling J. Epstein's deposition; work on dates for same; multiple communications with client, C. Pugatch,

CLIENT: 0002 - Jeffrey Epstein Re: 0001 Bradley Edwards Date Services 06/01/18 TLC Work on scheduling

its 3/29/18 0.20 150.00 Order regarding trial; (2) denying Petitioner's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees and Costs; (3) denying request for Oral Argument; (4) denying respondent's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees; and (5) denying Petitioner's Motion for Rehearing of denial of Petitioner's Motion

BACH9 PA April 10, 2018 Via Email jeevacationegmaitcom Jeffrey Epstein 6100 Red Hook Quarter, 83 St. Thomas, USVI 00802 Re: Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards File No.: 2.0001 Dear Jeffrey: 1555 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 301 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 TEL (561) 727-3600 I FAX (561) 727-3601 Attache

Addressing the Admissibility of Edwards' Exhibit 132; (12) Epstein's Motion in Limine re Sex Offender Registry; (13) Epstein's Motion in Limine on Edwards' Newly Disclosed Exhibits; (14) Epstein's Request for Judicial Notice; and (15) Objections to Deposition Designations; assemble hearing notebooks

ocket re stz 03/15/18 SJL Wt C issell's Motion for Pro H; on Reply to B. Edwards' .tition for Writ of kii, r ; with clients re si . • for Oral Argument; fo o disc 03/15/18 KBR Le . • ti ce/foreign rule and al '' ;; vepare/revise order (st nix Aural defect) of re . C ssell's pro hac vice

RECEIVED, 2/25/2015 3:10 PM, Clerk, Fourth District Court of Appeal BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, Appellant, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Appellee. / FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 4D14-2282 L.T. Case No.: 502009CA04

e litigation privilege applies to malicious prosecution claims, as well as its finding that the litigation privilege was applicable specifically to Edwards's claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process against Epstein, constituted issues of law. DelMonico, 116 So. 3d at 1211 (stating the dete

er trial court decision applying the litigation privilege to a malicious prosecution claim. This decision is on appeal to this Court and is set for Oral Argument on April 28, 2015. 10 EFTA00714933 Florida Supreme Court cases germane to the issues. In Wolfe, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the

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

er trial court decision applying the litigation privilege to a malicious prosecution claim. This decision is on appeal to this Court and is set for Oral Argument on April 28, 2015. 10 EFTA00613599 Florida Supreme Court cases germane to the issues. In Wolfe, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the