Epstein Secrets

follows: And I 7 8 am going to touch first a little bit on the 8 On behalf of the Defendants: 9 response because they claim that there is 9 JACK SCAROLA, ESQUIRE SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA, 10 additional discovery to be done, but they don't 10 BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A. 11 identify any discovery tha

h first a little bit on the 8 On behalf of the Defendants: 9 response because they claim that there is 9 JACK SCAROLA, ESQUIRE SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA, 10 additional discovery to be done, but they don't 10 BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A. 11 identify any discovery that they wish to do. 2139 Palm Beac

criminal, tinder the 9 court properly found that Russell showed — and 10 Civil Theft Statute 772.11. One, we think it's 10 again this is in the McMurray case — the 11 not applicable. Two is we don't think notice 11 non-existence of a genuine issue of material 12 is required. It's part of the -- t

ling. 4 my client in the counterclaim are really 4 And they go down and they cite relying on 5 Paragraphs 9, 10, and II. And the key is the 5 McMurray versus U-Haul which is the Fourth 6 action was filed for the sole purpose to 6 District case, which holds that the mere filing 7 intimidate Edw

tled to compensation for his time participating in litigation when he engaged counsel to represent him in the matter). Since Edwards has engaged Mr. Scarola from the outset of this case to represent him, Edwards cannot claim as damages his time assisting counsel or involvement in the subject litigation

py of the foregoing has been duly furnished via G Email, G Facsimile, G U.S. Mail, G Hand Delivery, G Federal Express this day of April, 2012 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. P.O. Drawer 3626 West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack Alan Goldberger,

ng of that lawsuit. Fifth, abuse of process is based on process used for an immediate purpose other than that for which it was designed. See, e.g., McMurray v. U-Haul Co., 425 So. 2d 1208 and n. I (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Edwards, however, does not allege that any specific process was used by Epstein for an

tedly baseless lawsuit. Given the fact that the mere filing or service of a spurious claim is not itself actionable as abuse of process, see, e.g., McMurray v. U-Haul Co., 425 So. 2d 1208, 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Blue v Weinstein, 381 So. 2d 308, 310 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), it necessarily follows that Edwa

led to compensation for his time participating in litigation when he engaged counsel to represent him in the matter). Since Edwards has engaged Mr. Scarola from the outset of this case, Edwards cannot claim his time assisting counsel or participating in this case as damages which would include his invo

py of the foregoing has been duly furnished via G Email, G Facsimile, G U.S. Mail, G Hand Delivery, G Federal Express this day of April, 2012 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. Drawer 3626 West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. At

ch requires abuse of the judicial system subsequent to the filing of a complaint — not purportedly unfounded allegations in a complaint. See, e.g., McMurray v. U-Haul Co., 425 So. 2d 1208, 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Blue v Weinstein, 381 So. 2d 308, 310 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Finally, to the extent that Edw

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via e-mail and U.S. Mail this day of May, 2011 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Gol

l and U.S. Mail this day of May, 2011 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley,

r purpose after an action was filed and process served. See,. e.g., Della-Donna v. Nova University, Inc., 512 So. 2d 1051, 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); McMurray v. U-Haul Co, Inc., 425 So. 2d 1208, 1209-10 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Accordingly, the filing of an action itself does not constitute abuse of process.

IFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via e-mail and U.S. Mail this day of October, 2011 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Gol

nd U.S. Mail this day of October, 2011 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley,

, 443 So. 2d 1025, 1026 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)(counterclaim allegedly causing undue expenditure of time and money did not constitute abuse of process); McMurray v. U-Haul Co., 425 So. 2d 1208, 1209 (Fla. 4'h DCA 1983)(same); Blue v. Weinstein, 381 So. 2d 308, 311 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)("[N]o abuse of the - 4 -

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via e-mail and U.S. Mail this day of May, 2011 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack A. Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Gol

l and U.S. Mail this day of May, 2011 to: Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley,

, 443 So. 2d 1025, 1026 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)(counterclaim allegedly causing undue expenditure of time and money did not constitute abuse of process); McMurray v. U-Haul Co., 425 So. 2d 1208, 1209 (Fla. 4'h DCA 1983)(same); Blue v. Weinstein, 381 So. 2d 308, 311 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)("[N]o abuse of the proces