Epstein Secrets

using CM/ECF. is/Dexter . Lee 31 EFTA00211748 SERVICE LIST Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. ~It Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 3 Attorneys for Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 Jacqueline Perczek BLACK SREBNICK KORNSPAN & STUMPF Roy E. Black BLACK SREBNICK KORNSP

G, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. ~It Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 3 Attorneys for Jane Doe 1 and Ja

t party in a previous proceeding.' Judicial estoppel is an equitable concept intended to prevent the perversion of the judicial process." Burnes 1. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., 291 F.3d 1282, 1285 (11th Cir. 2002) (citation omitted). Judicial estoppel prohibits "parties from deliberately changing positions according to th

Edwards Edwards Pottinger LP 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone : (800) 400-1098 E-Mail: [email protected] Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah* 383 S. University St. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: (801) 585-5202 E-

: (800) 400-1098 E-Mail: [email protected] Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice S.J. Quinney College of Law at the

CVRA action and the related civil suits. There is no concealment or unfairness that are the hallmarks for applying judicial estoppel. Cf. Burnes v. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., 291 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2002) (applying doctrine in circumstances showing deliberate concealment of assets). Instead of presenting evidence (such

Bradley J. Edwards Edwards Pottin er LP Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice This daytime business address is p

TATES JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2'S REPLY TO INTERVENOR EPSTEIN'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED REMEDIES Bradley J. Edwards Edwards Pottin er LP Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice This daytime business address is provided for identification and correspondence purposes only and is not intended to imply institutio

CVRA action and the related civil suits. There is no concealment or unfairness that are the hallmarks for applying judicial estoppel. Cf. Burnes v. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., 291 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2002) (applying doctrine in circumstances showing deliberate concealment of assets). Instead of presenting evidence (such