Epstein Secrets

ng the two docket entries at issue. (App. D- 2 References to "App." cites refer to the Appendix to Petitioner's Response in Opposition to Respondent Bradley J. Edwards' Motion for Partial Relief From Stay. 3 EFTA00805460 1, 4:19-5:1; App. D-2, 62:20-63:2). Moreover, it was Epstein's counsel, without being requir

unds states: Introduction No legal standing or basis exists for non-parties, L.M., E.W., and Jane Doe, to "join" any appellate motion or action by Edwards.' The unnecessary intervention appearance below by E.W., L.M. and Jane Doe, while never reduced to any written By order of this Court dated March 1

, Respondents/Defendants. MOTION TO STRIKE UNAUTHORIZED AND INAPPROPRIATE "JOINDER" FILED BY NON-PARTIES Petitioner, Jeffrey Epstein, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.300, moves to strike the "Joinder by Victims in Edwards' Motion for Partial Relief from Stay with Request for Expedited Consideration"

gument in his consolidated appeals from Judge Donald Hafele's March 8, 2018 rulings which resulted in two non-final orders, (1) granting Respondent Bradley J. Edwards' Motion for Separate Trials and (2) denying Petitioner's Motion to Remove Case from Trial Docket in Order to Comply with the Mandate in Rule 1.440.

"exempts only cross-claims from the determination of when an action is at issue."). The issues raised in these consolidated appeals were created by Edwards' eleventh-hour misuse of Rule 1.440 in a maneuvering effort to achieve severance or bifurcation of his counterclaim from the original claim filed b

N, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Respondents/Defendants. REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT Petitioner, Jeffrey Epstein, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.320, requests oral argument in the consolidated appeals (Case Nos. 4D18-0762 and 4D18-0787) and as grounds states: Petitioner respectf

. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Respondents/Defendants. PETITIONER'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT BRADLEY J. EDWARDS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL RELIEF FROM STAY Petitioner, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.300, responds in opp

rida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.300, responds in opposition to the Motion for Partial Relief from Stay filed by Respondent, Bradley J. Edwards ("Edwards")', on March 12, 2018, and states: Introduction and Overview of Arguments Edwards seeks to impose piecemeal constraints on the reasonable and tem

S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT BRADLEY J. EDWARDS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL RELIEF FROM STAY Petitioner, Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.300, responds in opposition to the Motion for Partial Relief from Stay filed by Respondent, Bradley J. Edwards ("Edwards")', on March 1