Epstein Secrets

, which occurred on October 13, 2018. Due to the impermissible questions, Epstein additionally moves this Court to require Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. ("Farmer Jaffe"), Bradley J. Edwards ("Edwards") and Intervenor L.M. ("L.M.") (collectively, the "Movants") to pay Epstein's

impermissible questions, Epstein additionally moves this Court to require Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. ("Farmer Jaffe"), Bradley J. Edwards ("Edwards") and Intervenor L.M. ("L.M.") (collectively, the "Movants") to pay Epstein's attorneys' fees for the excessive time spent at the depositi

ined images or copies of the subject documents on its computer or otherwise, the Court retains jurisdiction to award sanctions in favor of Farmer, Brad Edwards, or his client. (D.E. 1194.) During the April 13, 2018,' hearing on the Motions, Edwards' counsel asked the Court to be allowed to take the deposi

Motion for Issuance of an Order to Show Cause Why Fowler White and Jeffrey Epstein Should Not be Held in Contempt of Court, to Permit Discovery, to Assess Sanctions and Costs, and for Other Appropriate Relief. (D.E. 6326.) Edwards and L.M. joined that request. (D.E. 6325; D.E. 6345.) Movants allege that Fowler White EFTA

ained images of copies of the subject documents on its computer or otherwise, the Court retains jurisdiction to award sanctions in favor of Farmer. Brad Edwards or his client [El . . ." DE 1194 at 2 (emphasis added). While obscuring the fact that Epstein possessed — and so far as appears in the current fact

N 61 51) Attorneys for Intervenors.., M, and Jane Doe 12 EFTA00795956 Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6357 Filed 04/12/18 Page 13 of 14 SERVICE LIST Bradley J. Edwards FLBN 542075 Brittany N. Henderson FLBN 118247 Edwards Pottinger LLC 425 N Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale. FL 33301 Phone: (954)-524-2820

7 Edwards Pottinger LLC 425 N Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale. FL 33301 Phone: (954)-524-2820 Fax: Attorneys for Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Scott J. Link, Esq. Link &Rockenbach, PA. 1555 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard Suite 301 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: F

reply to Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to ■., ■., and Jane Doe's Joinder in Motion for Order to Show Cause and Motion for Discovery, to Assess Sanctions and Costs, and for Other Appropriate Relief [DE 6353]. INTRODUCTION In their motion, the Victims sought sanctions against Fowler White and Epstein for illega

nds therefore states as follows: Jeffrey Epstein issued a subpoena, through the Palm Beach State Court case of Jeffrey Epstein v. Scott Rothstein, Bradley J. Edwards, and L.M., Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida Case No. 50-2009 CA 040800XXXX MB AG (hereinafter "the Epstein lawsuit

the costs of the printing and Bates Numbering of the documents, and this Court retained jurisdiction to award sanctions on behalf of Fanner Jaffe, Edwards, or clients in the event that it was determined that Epstein or Fowler White retained images or copies of the subject documents on computer or other

or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. /s/ Brad Edwards Brad Edwards SERVICE LIST Joseph L. Ackerman, Jr., Esq. Fowler White Burnett, P.A. 901 Phillips Point West 777 South Flagler Drive West Palm B

upport of Farmer Jaffe's Motion to Show Cause Why Fowler White and Jeffrey Epstein Should Not Be Held in Contempt of Court, to Permit Discovery, to Assess Sanctions and Costs, and for Other Appropriate Relief, and as grounds therefore states as follows: Jeffrey Epstein issued a subpoena, through the Palm Beach State Cour

ate Relief [D.E. 6326] (the "Motion for Order to Show Cause"), the Responses [D.E. 6351, 6355], and the Reply [D.E. 6358] thereto. Interested Party Bradley Edwards filed a notice of joinder [D.E. 6325], and sexual assault victims, L.M., E.W., and Jane Doe, filed a Motion to Intervene [D.E. 6344] and a Motion fo

ly [D.E. 6358] thereto. Interested Party Bradley Edwards filed a notice of joinder [D.E. 6325], and sexual

otion for Issuance of an Order to Show Cause Why Fowler White and Jeffrey Epstein Should Not be Held in Contempt of Court, to Penn it Discovery, to Assess Sanctions and Costs, and for Other Appropriate Relief [D.E. 6326] (the "Motion for Order to Show Cause"), the Responses [D.E. 6351, 6355], and the Reply [D.E. 6358] th

ncludes counsel identified on the service list below. SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola Sears Denn , Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. yard Counsel for Bradley J. Edwards Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah Counsel for LM., E.W. and Jane Doe Chad Pugatch, Esq. Bradley J. Edwards

to Compel Jeffrey Epstein to Pay for the Production of All Documents in Response to his Requests filed by Interested Party Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L ("Farmer"), was adequately resolved by agreement of the parties as follows. The law firm of Fowler White Burnett, P.A., will

Motion for Issuance of an Order to Show Cause Why Fowler White and Jeffrey Epstein Should Not Be Held in Contempt of Court, to Permit Discovery, to Assess Sanctions and Costs, and for Other Relief (DE 6323; re-docketed as DE 6326) and Bradley Edwards' Joinder in Motion for Issuance of an Order to Show Cause (DE 6325)i. T

AND JEFFREY EPSTEIN SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, TO PERMIT DISCOVERY, TO ASSESS SANCTIONS AND COSTS, AND FOR OTHER APPROPRIATE RELIEF Bradley J. Edwards, through counsel, hereby files this Reply to Jeffrey Epstein's Response in Opposition to Farmer Jaffe's Motion to Show Cause Why Fowler White and Je

ODUCTION Jeffrey Epstein's Motion, through one misstatement after another, amounts to nothing more than his continued baseless disparagement of Mr. Edwards, and a poor attempt to deflect from his wrongdoing and avoid the pertinent issues. [DE 6351]. In 2010, a subpoena was issued to the RRA trustee tha

osition to Farmer Jaffe's Motion to Show Cause Why Fowler White and Jeffrey Epstein Should Not Be Held in Contempt of Court, to Permit Discovery, to Assess Sanctions and Costs, and for Other Appropriate Relief, and as grounds therefore states as follows: INTRODUCTION Jeffrey Epstein's Motion, through one misstatement aft