Epstein Secrets

er than Mr. Epstein and his co-counsel, that there have been no eyes laid upon these documents. Hence, I'm accepting that representation, as Mr. Scarola has accepted those representations during the hearing as well. (3/8/18 Aft. Tr. 78:9-25) (emphasis added). Paul Cassell, the Intervenors' couns

N Primary: Primary: Primary: Secondary: Secondary: Trial Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jay Epstein 13 EFTA00808684 SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola Karen E. Terry David P. Vitale, Jr. Searcy, Denny, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, . 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Co

to even assertedly privileged documents in any context other than at trial is completely nonsensical. Even a privilege log required under Florida's Rules of Civil Procedure as a condition to withhold documents on the basis of privilege must sufficiently identify the specific documents withheld with enough detail to fac

other than Mr. Epstein and his co-counsel, that there have been no eyes laid upon these documents. Hence accepting that representation, as Mr. Scarola has accepted those representations during the hearing as well. (3/8/18 Aft. Tr. 78:9-25) (emphasis added). Paul Cassell, the Intervenors' couns

J. Glasser (FBN Primary: Primary: Primary: Secondary: Secondary: FBN Trial Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jay Epstein SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola Karen E. Teny David P. Vitale, Jr. Searcy, Denny, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, M. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Co-

to even assertedly privileged documents in any context other than at trial is completely nonsensical. Even a privilege log required under Florida's Rules of Civil Procedure as a condition to withhold documents on the basis of privilege must sufficiently identify the specific documents withheld with enough detail to fac

06/06/2012 PtChle°S of 22 Tonja Haddad Coleman From: Tonja Haddad Coleman Sent: Tuesday. May 29, 2012 10:47 AM To: 'Mary E. Pirrotta' Cc: 'Jack Scarola' Subject: RE: Edwards adv. Epstein Jack: To avoid any further miscommunications, misunderstandings, attempts to circumvent or delay the legal proc

an From: Sent: To: Subject: Thank you. Jack Scarola Tuesday, May 08, 2012 3:41 PM Re: Epstein disco

pstein is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees necessitated by Defendant's flagrant disregard of both this Court's Order and the afore- referenced Rules of Civil Procedure. CONCLUSION Accordingly, for all of the reasons delineated above and in reliance upon the applicable law cited herein, Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein r

es here. On March 8, 2018, Edwards' counsel, Jack Scarola, implied (incorrectly) that the e-mails were sha

annot have his cake and eat it too. Simply put, actions speak louder than words. The general rule applies here. On March 8, 2018, Edwards' counsel, Jack Scarola, implied (incorrectly) that the e-mails were shared with Epstein's counsel by Mr. Scherer, counsel for Razorback. Thus, Edwards admits that he volu

dwards' failure to comply with the Court's Order. Because Edwards blatantly disregarded the Court's Order, as well as the requirements of Florida's Rules of Civil Procedure and the TIG case, the February 23, 2011 privilege log remains for any number of wholly deficient and worse - misleading. The privilege log misstate