Epstein Secrets

Olas Blvd., Suite 1200 Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33301 Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. (Pro Hac Vice) Stanley Pottinger, Esq. EDWARDS

Suite 1200 Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33301 Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. (Pro Hac Vice) Stanley Pottinger, Esq. ED

All Defendants) All documents evidencing money paid to at any time. DOCUMENT REQUEST NO. 6 (Directed to All Defendants) All documents relating to the Fashion Institute of Technology ("F.I.T."). 7 EFTA00793331 DOCUMENT REQUEST NO. 7 (Directed to All Defendants) All communications with F.I.T. related in any way to DOCUMENT RE

mitted, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP By /s/ Michael Miller Justin Y.K. Chu Attorneys for Defendants JEFFREY EPSTEIN & To: FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. Brad Edwards Attorney for Plaintiff Jane Doe 43 ALSTON & BIRD, LLP Alexander S Lorenzo John E. Stephenson, Jr. (Applic

By /s/ Michael Miller Justin Y.K. Chu Attorneys for Defendants JEFFREY EPSTEIN & To: FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. Brad Edwards Attorney for Plaintiff Jane Doe 43 ALSTON & BIRD, LLP Alexander S Lorenzo John E. Stephenson, Jr. (Application for admission pro hac vice pend

ns of fraud boil down to this: Epstein allegedly "confirmed to Plaintiff that he would use his wealth and influence to have Plaintiff admitted into the Fashion Institute of Technology" ("E") and to advanced her career, but had no intention of doing so. FAC ¶¶ 38, 53, 58-64. This is insufficient to satisfy Rule 9(b). First, the F

Michael C. Miller 1114 Avenue of the Americas New York. NY 10036 main www.steploe.com May 2017 Brad Edwards, Esq. Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Re: Jane Doe 43 v. Je

Michael C. Miller 1114 Avenue of the Americas New York. NY 10036 main www.steploe.com May 2017 Brad Edwards, Esq. Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Re: Jane Doe 43 v. Jeffery Epstein, et al. Civil Action No.

ns of fraud boil down to this: Epstein allegedly "confirmed to Plaintiff that he would use his wealth and influence to have Plaintiff admitted into the Fashion Institute of Technology" ("E"), but had no intention of doing so. Cplt. ¶¶ 37, 50, 53-55. This is insufficient to satisfy Rule 9(b). First, the Complaint fails to identify