Epstein Secrets

ruling on the issue of probable cause, and an opportunity for the parties to be heard at oral argument on this motion. TONJA ET AL. SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola, Es . Searcy Denney Scarola et al. 25 EFTA00799363 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack Goldber er, Es . • Atterbury,

on this motion. TONJA ET AL. SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola, Es . Searcy Denney Scarola et al. 25 EFTA0079

Rothstein, 09-60331-CR-COHN. 3 EFTA00799341 Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et aL, Case No. 09-062943(19) (hereinafter referenced as the "Razorback Complaint"), against Scott Rothstein and others detailing abusive litigation practices specifically in active RRA cases against Epstein (the "Epstein Cases")4

to be heard at oral argument regarding any assertions by Edwards attempting to refute the existence of probable cause. TONJA ET AL. SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola, Es . Searcy Denney Scarola et al. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack Goldber er, Es . Atterbury, Goldberger, & Weiss, P

probable cause. TONJA ET AL. SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola, Es . Searcy Denney Scarola et al. 2139 Palm Be

of Conrad Scherer filed a complaint, Razorback Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et aL, Case No. 09-062943(19) (hereinafter referenced as the "Razorback Complaint"), against Scott Rothstein and others alleging a fraudulent scheme perpetrated at RRA involving, among other deceptive practices, fraudulent conspir

ris SERVICE LIST: William B. King Searcy Denny Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. Philip M. Burlington

against Scott Rothstein and others, Razorback Funding, LLC, et al. v. Scott W. Rothstein, et aL, Case No. 09-062943(19) (hereinafter referenced as the "Razorback Complaint"), on behalf of some of the Ponzi Scheme investors. 9. Upon reviewing the Razorback Complaint, I learned that the Razorback Complaint detailed the