4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
5 / 5
Mentions
in, 495 So. 2d at 262; Alachua Gen. Hosp. v. Zimmer USA, Inc., 403 So. 2d 1087, 1088 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (privilege continues after case concludes); United States v. International Business Machs. Corp., 66 F.R.D. 154, 178 (S.D.N.Y.1974) (privilege applies only if the work product was gathered in anticipation o
s to confidential communications made in the rendition of legal services to the client. Section 90.502, Fla. Stat.; Southern Bell Tel. & TeL Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377 (Fla.1994). Section 90.502 codifies the attorney-client privilege which protects those confidential communications between attorney
of whether they pertain to confidential communications between attorney and client. F1a.R.Civ.P. 1.280(b)(2). See Southern Bell TeL & Tel. Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 1994). The privilege may also protect an attorney's mental impressions which may be disclosed through testimony. Hamilton v.
torney for another party where a joint defense effort or strategy has been decided upon and undertaken by the parties and their respective counsel. See United States v. Bay State Ambulance and Hosp. 12 EFTA00582868 Epstein v. Rothstein and Edwards DRAFT 2/3/12 4:26 PM Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMB/Div. AG
keep the shared information confidential from outsiders." Ken's Foods, Inc. v. Ken's Steak House, Inc., 213 F.R.D. 89, 93 (D. Mass. 2002). See also United States v. Sawyer, 878 F. Supp. 295, 297 (D. Mass. 1995) (despite similar interests between employer and employee, there was insufficient evidence that comm
f whether they pertain to confidential communications between attorney and client. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280(b)(2). See Southern Bell Tel. & TeL Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 1994). Work product is a qualified immunity from discovery. See DeBartolo-Aventura, Inc. v. Hernandez, 638 So. 2d 988 (Fla.
Q: Have the only conversations that you have had with Ms. Marie Villfana or Villafana, have they only been in the context of Jane Doe 1 and 2 versus United States of America, only in the context of that case? Id. at page 216; line 9-13. 11 Tonja Haddad, P.A. • 315 SE 7th Street, Fort Lauderdale, FL 3330I• 954.467.1223
e the same or similar information is available through ordinary investigative techniques and discovery procedures.'" Southern Bell TeL & TeL Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377, 1384 (Fla. 1994). Here, the information sought by Epstein from Edwards in deposition is not "available through ordinary investiga
Q: Have the only conversations that you have had with Ms. Marie Villfana or Villafana, have they only been in the context of Jane Doe 1 and 2 versus United States of America, only in the context of that case? Id. at page 216; line 9-13. MR. SCAROLA: Same objection. Id. at page 216; line 14. Q: And I will separate out th
ques and 19 Tonja Haddad, P.A. • 315 SE 7th Street, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 EFTA00585412 discovery procedures.'" Southern Bell TeL & TeL Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377, 1384 (Fla. 1994). Here, the information sought by Epstein from Edwards in deposition is not "available through ordinary investiga
Entities connected to both United States and Deason

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
George W. Bush
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
Alan Dershowitz
PERSONJane Doe
PERSON
Kenneth Marra
PERSON
Bradley Edwards
PERSON
Marc Rich
PERSON
Donald Trump
PERSON
Bill Clinton
PERSONJack Goldberger
PERSONMaria Farmer
PERSON
A. Marie Villafana
PERSON
Alfredo Rodriguez
PERSON
Oliver Stone
PERSONScott Rothstein
PERSON
Naomi Campbell
PERSON
Les Wexner
PERSONJoe Recarey
PERSONJack Scarola
PERSON