Epstein Secrets

, which forced Dershowitz to seek the issuance of the subpoena through the commission process and ultimately to effect service on Jane Doe No. 3 in Colorado. After all that. Jane Doe No. 3's lawyers asked Dershowitz to consent to having this Court resolve the discovery dispute and for her deposition to b

ment are inapposite because they involved attempts to obtain information that had no "possible relevance" to the issues in dispute. For example, in Calvo v. Calvo, 489 So. 2d 833, 834 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), the Third District held that an ex-wife's financial records had no "possible relevance" to her po

3, which forced Dershowitz to seek the issuance of the subpoena through the commission process and ultimately to effect service on Jane Doe No. 3 in Colorado. After all that, Jane Doe No. 3's lawyers asked Dershowitz to consent to having this Court resolve the discovery dispute and for her deposition to

ment are inapposite because they involved attempts to obtain information that had no "possible relevance" to the issues in dispute. For example, in Calvo v. Calvo, 489 So. 2d 833, 834 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), the Third District held that an ex-wife's financial records had no "possible relevance" to her po

o do with this Florida Defamation Action; rather, he is trying to find a way to send this victim of sexual trafficking to “Jail.” “She was hiding in Colorado...but we found her and she will have to be deposed. The end * For the limited purpose of the Motion to Quash or for Protective Order and resolving t

at the contents of the “subpoena is a classic ‘fishing expedition’ and the trial court’s order departs from the essential requirements of the law.”); Calvo v. Calvo, 489 So. 2d 833, 834 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (quashing subpoena served on wife’s bank for financial records finding them irrelevant: “indeed, the