ng to the Order granting additional time, not only for an extension of time but also for a stay in the preparation of the privilege log pending its Motion for Summary Judgment to be heard by this Court (A: 16). Edwards filed a similar motion with this Court which is presently set for hearing on January 27, 2011. On Decem

00808640 for.") (8/4/08 Tr. 4-5) (Ex. A.) It was not until March 21, 2011, about a year after settling her lawsuit with Epstein, when M. filed her Motion for Summary Judgment for Finding Violations of the NPA, that it was clear that M. was continuing with her efforts to invalidate the NPA. Epstein should be able to prese

ion is deficient on its face, and in direct contravention to the facts. As such, Edwards's Motion should be denied. INTRODUCTION Epstein filed his Motion for Summary Judgment on June 30, 2017, and in support thereof executed an affidavit, which was nearly identical to the one he executed in support of his previously file

cess and malicious prosecution. Both causes of action were premised upon Epstein's initial filing of his lawsuit against Edwards. Epstein filed his Motion for Summary Judgment, asserting therein that both the abuse of process claim and the malicious prosecution claim filed by Edwards against Epstein were barred by the lit

cess and malicious prosecution. Both causes of action were premised upon Epstein's initial filing of his lawsuit against Edwards. Epstein filed his Motion for Summary Judgment, asserting therein that both the abuse of process claim and the malicious prosecution claim filed by Edwards against Epstein were barred by the liti