Document DOJ-COURT-334 is a legal document from the United States District Court Southern District of Florida, specifically a motion filed by Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys.
This document pertains to Case No. 08-CIV-80119, involving Jane Doe No. 2 as the plaintiff and Jeffrey Epstein as the defendant. It is a motion to strike the plaintiff's appeal as untimely, arguing that it was filed outside the ten-day period allowed for appeals of a Magistrate Judge's order. The document references several related cases and local rules of the court.
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 334 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2009
Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. --------------~/ Related cases: 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 I DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF, JANE DOE 2-S'S APPEAL (DE 327) AS UNTIMELY Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein" or Defendant), by and through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully moves this Court for an order Striking Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2-8's Appeal at DE 327. Local Rule 12 allows for this court to strike same. As good cause in support of granting the motion, Defendant states: 1. On August 31, 2009, Defendant filed his Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Rule 4 Appeal (DE 282) and his Supplementary Brief Providing For a More Particularized Showing (DE 282)("Defendant's Motion/Appeal and Supplementary Brief'). 2. On September 9, 2009, the Magistrate Judge entered her order on Defendant's Motion/Appeal and Supplementary Brief (DE 292). Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 334 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2009
Page 2 of 4 3. On September 24, 2009, 15 days after the Magistrate's Order had been entered, Plaintiff finally filed her Rule 4 Appeal - unfortunately too late. No matter which way Plaintiff attempts to calculate the ten (10) day period under Rule 4, Plaintiff remains untimely. Local Rule 7.1 does not apply to Court orders, but clearly distinguishes business days and legal holidays as exclusions in calculating due dates for responses and replies. Local Rule 4 clearly states that an Appeal of A Magistrate's Order must be made within 10 days after being served with said order. Thus, weekends are included in the calculation and, as a result, Plaintiff is untimely. See Cornelius v. Home Comings Financial Network, 293 Fed.Appx. 723, 7282009 WL 4230197 (C.A.11 (Ga.))(granting motion to strike for failing to timely file responses and objections to magistrate's order) 4. The Rule is clear - a Rule 4 Appeal must be filed within the ten (10) day time period allowed under Local Rule 4, Review and Appeal, U.S. District Court - Southern District. Again, Plaintiff failed to timely comply. Therefore, Plaintiff's Rule 4 Appeal should be stricken as untimely in accordance with the Rule and the above case law. Wherefore, Defendant respectfully requests that this court enter an order: a. striking Plaintiff's Rule 4 Appeal (DE 327); and b. for such other and further relief as this court d ems just and proper. Br,:i:i"~'"'iZ~~7"'.:::::._ Florida Bar #617296 Certificate of Service Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 334 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2009
Page 3 of 4 I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing do ment is being served this day on all counsel of record identifid on the f llo i g Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of +,,6,4ir,t-fl:irt._,q.-•• 2009 By::-1±:-=-:¥-::-::-::r=-::-:-:--:c:,---:=-: RO ON, JR., ESQ. F I ar No. 224162 [email protected] MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 [email protected] BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08- 80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Brad Edwards, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hae Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 334 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2009






