Epstein Secrets

March 23, 2010, counsel to Epstein deposed Edwards. During that examination, Edwards refused to answer numerous questions to which he or his counsel Jack Scarola objected. For example, he was asked generically about RRA's document storage system: Q. And what type of information did you put into Q-task regard

gh Edwards could have answered the question without disclosing information intended to be kept confidential by his client L.M3 Id. at 99. 10. Mr. Scarola also erroneously counseled Edwards not to answer a series of question about his communications with federal prosecutors: ". . .do you know whether,

ion between fact and opinion work product. Work product protection is limited to materials which are not intended to be used as evidence at trial. Northup v. Acken, 865 So. 2d 1267, 1270 (Fla. 2004) ("when a party reasonably expects or intends to utilize an item before the court at trial, for impeachme

nt or otherwise, the video recording, document, exhibit, or other piece of evidence is fully discoverable and is not privileged work product."). In Northup, the court remarked that a litigant must decide whether the material is going to be used only for strategy and trial preparation purposes prior to t

S. Mail on this IM day of January, 2012 to: Jack Scarola, Esq., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley,

VICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via electronic mail and U.S. Mail on this IM day of January, 2012 to: Jack Scarola, Esq., Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A., 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, FL 33409; Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq., Atterbur

nc. v. Hernandez, 638 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). The work product privilege does not extend to materials intended for use as evidence at trial. Northup v. Acken, 865 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 2004). Work product falls into two categories: 1) "fact" work product consisting of factual information pertaining

Attorney E-Mail Primary E-Mail: Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulev

vilege, and Epstein's attempt to invade that privilege to cure any purported defect in the defense's preparation of this case should be rejected. 50 Northup v. Acken, 865 So. 2d 1267, 1270 (Fla. 2004) ("Personal views of the attorneys as to how and when to present evidence, his evaluation of its relativ