Epstein Secrets

1996); Shell Oil Co., 866 F. Supp. at 540-41. Court-Appointed Receiver of Lancer Mgt. Group LLCI. Lauer, 2009 WL 800144 (S.D. Fl. Mar. 25, 2009) (Marra, J.). Thus, before reaching the relative benefit and prejudice to each of the parties caused by staying the cases, the Court must determine whether

al., 5 Plaintiffs, I JUNE 12, 2009 6 vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. 9 10 7 8 11 12 TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE APPEARANCES: 13 FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: 14 15 16 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Bou

n to suppress or to dismiss the indictment in that criminal action. See, e.g., United States, ex. rel. Westrickl. Second Chance, 2007 WL 1020808 '4 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2007) (Defendant in civil False Claims Act suit moved to stay civil action pending criminal -10- EFTA00185215 Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Document 21 Enter

it against the Government based upon its handling of the criminal case against Epstein. (See In re Jane Doe Litigation, Court File No. 08-80736-Civ- Marra.) There has been no allegation, and certainly no showing, that the civil litigation is a ruse to obtain discovery on behalf of the criminal investig

to suppress or to dismiss the indictment in that criminal action. See, e.g., United States, ex. rel. Westrick v. Second Chance, 2007 WL 1020808 *4 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2007) (Defendant in civil False Claims Act suit moved to stay civil action pending criminal -10- EFTA00602062 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 121 En

. 1996); Shell Oil Co., 866 F. Supp. at 540-41. Court-Appointed Receiver of Lancer Mgt. Group LLCI. Lauer, 2009 WL 800144 (S.D. H. Mar. 25, 2009) (Marra, J.). Thus, before reaching the relative benefit and prejudice to each of the parties caused by staying the cases, the Court must determine whether

ion to suppress or to dismiss the indictment in that criminal action. See, e.g., United States, ex. reL Westrickl Second Chance, 2007 WL 1020808 *4 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2007) (Defendant in civil False Claims Act suit moved to stay civil action pending criminal -10- EFTA00222214 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 121 En

. 1996); Shell Oil Co., 866 F. Supp. at 540-41. Court-Appointed Receiver of Lancer Mgt. Group LLCI Lauer. 2009 WL 800144 (S.D. Fl. Mar. 25, 2009) (Marra, J.). Thus, before reaching the relative benefit and prejudice to each of the parties caused by staying the cases, the Court must determine whether

on to suppress or to dismiss the indictment in that criminal action. See, e.g., United States, ex. rel. Westrickl Second Chance, 2007 WL 1020808 *4 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2007) (Defendant in civil False Claims Act suit moved to stay civil action pending criminal -10- EFTA00222770 investigation where no indictment had be

1996); Shell Oil Co. , 866 F. Supp. at 540-41. Court-Appointed Receiver of Lancer Mgt. Group LLC I Lauer , 2009 WL 800144 (S.D. Fl. Mar. 25, 2009) (Marra, J.). Thus, before reaching the relative benefit and prejudice to each of the parties caused by staying the cases, the Court must determine whether

to suppress or to dismiss the indictment in that criminal action. See, e.g., United States, ex. rel. Westrick. Second Chance , 2007 WL 1020808 *4 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2007) (Defendant in civil False Claims Act suit moved to stay civil action pending criminal investigation where no indictment had been returned. The dist

it against the Government based upon its handling of the criminal case against Epstein. (See In re Jane Doe Litigation, Court File No. 08-80736-Civ- Marra.) There has been no allegation, and certainly no showing, that the civil litigation is a ruse to obtain discovery on behalf of the criminal investig

to suppress or to dismiss the indictment in that criminal action. See, e.g., United States, ex. rel. Westrick v. Second Chance, 2007 WL 1020808 *4 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2007) (Defendant in civil False Claims Act suit moved to stay civil action pending criminal -10- EFTA00599151 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 121 En