Epstein Secrets

l to the following counsel of record: Sigrid S. McCawley Meridith Schultz BOWS SCHILLER & FLEXNER. LLP

ISLAINE MAXWELL'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS via email to the following counsel of record: Sigrid S. McCawley Meridith Schultz BOWS SCHILLER & FLEXNER. LLP Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33301 ME I FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN. P.L. Ft. Lauder

g any alleged illegal activity involving Plaintiff from the Relevant Period. This request includes, but is not limited to, any documents concerning the Roadhouse Grill in Florida. RESPONSE: Ms. Maxwell objects to this Request as vague and confusing. Ms. Maxwell is unaware of all illegal activities in which Plainti

.m. 10 Before: 11 HON. ROBERT W. SWEET, 12 District Judge 13 APPEARANCES 14 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 15 Attorneys for Plaintiff BY: SIGRID S. McCAWLEY, ESQ. 16 MEREDITH L. SCHULTZ, ESQ. 17 S.J. QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH For Plaintiff 18 BY: PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQ. 19 HA

arrowness 5 of our motion here. We seek to preclude evidence involving 6 that litigation. Your Honor has already heard from my 7 colleague, Ms. McCawley, who has presented our argument for why 8 Dershowitz should not be in this case at all, and of course, if 9 we prevail on point 1, this point bec

at entire time. 20 It got quashed because it had been such a long passage of time. 21 THE COURT: Who was the employer? 22 MS. MENNINGER: It was the Roadhouse Grill, your 23 Honor. It was a burger joint. And she was working at that 24 Roadhouse Grill in March of 2002 during the period of time she 25 claims

rk, N.Y. March 31, 2017 LO310 a.m, Before? HON. ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge APPEARANCES BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff BY: SIGRID S. McCAWLEY, ESQ. MEREDITH L. SCHULTZ, ESQ. S.J. QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH For Plaintiff BY: PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQ. HADDON, MORGAN AND FORE

hasize the narrowness of our motion here. We seek to preclud vidence involving that litigation. Your Honor has already heard from my colleague, Ms. McCawley, who has presented our argument for why Dershowitz should not be in this case at all, and of course, if we prevail on point 1, this point becomes i

try during that entire time. It got quashed because it had been such a long passage of time. THE COURT: Who was the employer? MS. MENNINGER: It was the Roadhouse Grill, your Honor. It was a burger joint. And she was working at that Roadhouse Grill in March of 2002 during the period of time she claims that she was