Epstein Secrets

belialfciftiie Piaintiff. APPEAR]NG·ON,DEHALF \)F PI.:AINTIFl'.13.8.: SPENGER T. KUYIN. ESQ, LEOPOLIFKUVIN, P,A. 2925:J'GA Bo~lcvard, Suitc.200 Palm Beach Gardens, Flon<la .3341 <i .APP,EARJNG Ol'./.1:3.EHALE OF PL,'.\INl;IFFS' JANE I>QF.<; 2~8: AQAM 1:10Jl9WJTZ,.E~Q. MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P:A. 18205.Disc

ofsaid 7 deposilion.on behalfof the Plaintiff. 8' 9 OF PLAINTIFF B.B.r 10 SPENCER T. KUVIN. ESQ. LEOPOLiKKUVIN,P.A. 11 2925.*PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida ,33410 12 13 .APPEARING ONBEHAEEOF PLAINTIFFS'JANE DOES 2-8: 14 ADAM HOROWITZ. ESQ. MERMH-STEIN & HOROWITZ, P:A. 1-5 18205iBiscayne Boulevar

o dozens of victims who were abused in Florida. 2 While beyond the scope of a bail hearing, as discussed further below, it is well-established in the Second Circuit that absent an express provision to the contrary in the agreement, one District is not bound by the terms of an agreement entered into between a defe

Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 Couns

nt. See In re Grand Jury Subpoenfh 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2nd Cir. 1993). Here, Plaintiffs overly broad request see

2, 08-80380, 08- 80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq. Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq. Leopold Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone: (561) 515-1400/Fax: (561) 515-1401 [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 0

F.R.D. 583, 585 (S.D.N.Y. 1976) (denying motion to intervene, but allowing party to participate as amicus curiae in the case), ajf'd, 556 F.2d 554 (2d Cir. 1976); United States v. Mass. Mar. Acad., 76 F.R.D. 595, 598 (D. Mass. 1977) (same). Amicus status is particularly warranted where, as here, the put

West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Counsel for Defendan Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Fax: Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 08804 Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 Jack Alan

t 1313. Hoffenberg suggests that United States v. Leonard, 50 F.3d 1152, 1158 (2d Cir.I995), suggests a high- er standard of proof. In Leonard, the Second Circuit instructed that "the district court should consider any evidence with a significant degree of probative value, and should rest its finding on evid