Epstein Secrets

SON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah Attorneys for Jane Doe # I and Jane Doe # 2 Roy Black Jackie Perczek Black, Srebnick, Kom

eissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University o

lan thus rejects the argument made by petitioners that Rule 21 applies because it is more specific. D.E. 310 at 15-16, citin International Broth. of Teamsters'. AFL-CIO 32 F.R.D. 441, 442 (E.D.Mich. 1963). Since it is a precedential decision of the Eleventh Circuit, McLellan is binding authority. Accordin

SON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell 20 EFTA00210639 C! tin" 1- • Attorneys for Jane Doe # 1 and Jane Doe # 2 Roy Black Jackie Perczek E-mail: [email protected] jnerczek@royb

eissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell 20 EFTA00210639 C! tin" 1- • Attorneys for

cLellan rejects the argument made by petitioners that Rule 21 applies because it is more specific. D.E. 310 at 15-16, citing International Broth. of Teamsters'. AFL-CIO, 32 F.R.D. 441, 442 (E.D.Mich. 1963). Since it is a precedent decision of the Eleventh Circuit, McLellan is binding authority. Rule 15 go

ING, P.L. DWARDS. FIST0S & LEHRMAN, and Paul G. Cassell Pro Hoc Vice S.J. Quinney College of Law at the

February 6. 2015 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Bradley J. Edwards Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE. WEISSING, P.L. DWARDS. FIST0S & LEHRMAN, and Paul G. Cassell Pro Hoc Vice S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah Attorneys for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 • This daytime business address is

to a complaint seeks to effect a change in the parties to the action, Rule 21 ... controls and, to that extent, limits Rule I5(a)." Intl Broth. of Teamsters'. AFL-CIO, 32 F.R.D. 441, 442 (E.D. Mich. 1963). While the Government cites three cases allowing the addition of new parties through Rule IS (DE 29