EFTA01125055.pdf

0001 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL? CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 Complex Litigation, Fla.R.Civ.Pro.1201 3 CASE NO. 50 2009CA040800XXXXMB AG 4 5 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 6 Plaintiff, 7 vs. 8 SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, 9 and L.M., individually, 10 Defendants. 11 12 13 DEPOSITION OF 14 RUSSELL S. ADLER 15 16 Taken on Behalf of the Plaintiff 17 DATE TAKEN: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 TIME: 9:10 AM - 3:00 PM 18 PLACE: Fowler White Burnett, P.A. One Financial Plaza - 21st Floor 19 100 Southeast 3rd Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 20 21 22 Examination of the witness taken before: 23 Lee Lynott, Certified Merit Reporter Registered Professional Reporter 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter, Florida Hi-Tech/United Reporting, Inc. 25 1218 SE 3rd Avenue 0002 1 2 3 APPEARANCE FOR THE PLAINTIFF: 4 FOWLER WHITE BURNETT, P.A. BY: SUSAN APRIL, ESQUIRE 5 One Financial Plaza - 21st Floor 100 Southeast 3rd Avenue 6 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394 7 APPEARANCE FOR THE DEFENDANT BRADLEY EDWARDS: 8 SEARCY DENNEY SCAROLA BARNHART 6 SHIPLEY 9 BY: WILLIAM KING, ESQUIRE 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard 10 West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 11 EFTA01125055  APPEARANCE FOR THE WITNESS, RUSSELL S. ADLER: 12 FRED HADDAD LAW OFFICES 13 BY: FRED HADDAD, ESQUIRE One Financial Plaza - Suite 2612 14 100 Southeast 3rd Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 0003 1 INDEX 2 3 Deposition of Russell S. Adler: Page No. 4 Direct Examination by Mrs. April 4 5 Cross Examination by Mr. Xing 151 6 Certificate of Oath 155 7 Certificate of Reporter 156 8 Read and Sign Letter to Witness 157 9 Errata Sheet (to be forwarded upon execution) 158 10 11 * * * 12 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT INDEX 13 Exhibit. Description Page No. 14 No. 1 Subpoena For Deposition Duces Tecum 6 15 16 DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT INDEX 17 No. Description Page No. 18 ***** NONE ***** 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 0004 1 THEREUPON, 2 THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm 3 that the testimony you are about to give will be 4 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 5 truth? 6 * * * 7 WHEREUPON, 8 RUSSELL S. ADLER 9 acknowledged having been first duly sworn to tell the 10 truth, testified upon his oath as follows: ••••••• ••••• EFTA01125056 11 THE WITNESS: I do. 12 DIRECT EXAMINATION 13 BY MRS. APRIL: 14 Q Sir, my name is Susan April. We met just a 15 few minutes ago I guess on the other side of the room 16 here. Thank you for coming today. 17 You know, of course, Mr. Haddad is your 18 lawyer today, right? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And you know Bill King over here? 21 A Just met him. 22 Q Just met him? And you were out in the 23 hallway talking to him for a moment? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Can I ask you what you were talking about? 0005 1 A What we were talking about? 2 Q Yeah. 3 A Just the fact that much of what we 4 anticipate that you're going to ask is protected by 5 the work-product privilege and I told him I would 6 invoke it as I see necessary. 7 Q Alrighty. Let me get down some basic 8 information. Is your full name Russell S. Adler? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Can I get your current address? 11 A I'm presently residing at 12 13 Q Are you currently employed? 14 A Self-employed. 15 Q What is the name of your business? 16 A Russell S. Adler, P.A. 17 Q And where is your business address? 18 A 401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400. 19 Q How long have you been with that firm as a 20 self-employed attorney? 21 A Since November 2009. 22 Q What's your date of birth, sir? 23 A 24 Q Are you taking any medications or anything 25 that would impair your ability to testify truthfully 0006 1 today -- 2 A No. 3 Q -- or impair your memory? 4 Did you see a Notice of Taking Deposition 5 with an attached subpoena for this deposition? 6 A I saw the subpoena. I don't know that I 7 ever saw the notice. 8 Q Did you bring any documents with you today? 9 A NO. 10 Q Did you understand the subpoena to request 11 that you bring documents? 12 A Please show it to me. 13 Q I will. EFTA01125057 14 A I may have read it. I don't recall what it 15 says as I sit here now. 16 (WHEREUPON, the document was marked as an 17 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1 for Identification and 18 attached). 19 A I guess you want me to look at the duces 20 tecum? 21 Q Please. Do you recall seeing that, sir? 22 A Briefly. 23 Q Can you tell me on page -- Well, it's 24 numbered Page 6 because it was numbered I guess as an 25 attachment to a notice, but where it says "requests" 0007 1 in the middle of Page 6. 2 A I'm looking at it. 3 Q Did you search for any documents that you 4 believe would be responsive to these requests? 5 A I'm reading it. Hold on. 6 Q Well, let's go through it because it will 7 save time I think. 8 A Go ahead. 9 Q The first one: Did you look to see if you 10 had documents evidencing any and all written 11 communications between you and Bradley Edwards 12 regarding any pending and/or contemplating litigation 13 against Jeffrey Epstein from September 2008 to the 14 present? 15 A Let me save you some time and paint with a 16 broad brush. Any communications between myself or 17 Brad Edwards - or I see you even have Scott Rothstein 18 listed in another one of these requests - during the 19 time that I was employed by the RRA firm is 20 work-product privilege and / invoke that privilege 21 and I will refuse to answer any questions concerning 22 any such communications. That privilege extends to 23 any of these documents that you're requesting that 24 fits within those parameters. 25 Q Well, let me -- 0008 1 A As to Number 1, there is absolutely nothing 2 concerning this from, let's say, November or October 3 31st, 2009 through the present. 4 As to anything from 2008 through November 5 of 2009, that would be the time that I was employed 6 by RRA and you are not entitled to those documents 7 if, in fact, they even exist because it's 8 work-product privilege. 9 Q Well, let me ask you this question. You 10 just said if, in fact, they even exist. What I'm 11 asking you is, let's go back to my earlier questions: 12 Did you look to see if you have any documents, 13 whether or not they would be work-product, for that 14 period of time? 15 A I don't even have access to those documents 16 any more. They're the property of the bankruptcy EFTA01125058 17 trustee -- 18 (WHEREUPON, an off-the-record discussion 19 was had). 20 A First of all, you interrupted me in the 21 middle of my answer to the question. 22 Q I'm sorry. She barged in. 23 A Let me finish. 24 MRS. APRIL: How about you read it back? 25 (WHEREUPON, the requested testimony was 0009 1 read back by the court reporter). 2 THE WITNESS: They're the property of the 3 bankruptcy Trustee. I don't even know if I'm 4 still a member of any QTASK process concerning 5 these matters. 6 But in any event, the Trustee has made it 7 very clear that the files that were being 8 handled by the firm are the property of the 9 bankruptcy Trustee unless they have been 10 transferred out to another attorney, and they 11 were not transferred to me. So, no, I do not 12 have the right to see those files or access to 13 those files. 14 BY MRS. APRIL: 15 Q So you don't have them you're saying? 16 A Correct. 17 Q Therefore, you didn't look because you know 18 you don't have them? 19 A Correct. 20 Q I think, just to be clear, that you said 21 anything from November 1st, 2009 to the present is 22 nothing that exists that's responsive to Number 1? 23 A Correct. 24 Q Number 2, did you look to see if you had 25 any communications, and that would include e-mails, 0010 1 between you and Mr. Edwards about compensation or 2 benefits that he expected or requested from the firm 3 from September 2008 to October 31st, 2000 -- 4 A There were no such communications -- 5 Q Can I finish my question, sir? I know 6 you've been in depositions, right? 7 A Well, why don't you just ask me if I have 8 anything responsive to Number 2? You don't have to 9 read it to me on the record. I can read. 10 Q Sir, this will go smoother and faster. I 11 think I'm being courteous to you -- 12 A It will go a lot faster -- 13 Q If you're not going to let me finish my 14 questions, we're going to be here really long and I 15 have things to do also. 16 A If you insist on reading everything to me 17 that is right in front of me it is going to take 18 really long, but I'm not going to tell you how to 19 take your deposition. So, finish the question. EFTA01125059 20 Q Thank you. Have you had a chance to look 21 at Number 2? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Do you have any documents that are 24 responsive? 25 A No. 0011 1 Q Did you look to see if you have any? 2 A No. But I was not even involved in Brad 3 Edwards' compensation or benefits when he was hired 4 by RRA, so I know I don't have anything -- I know 5 that there's nothing like that out there. And if 6 there is, I don't have access to it any way. 7 Q Let me ask you about that for a minute. 8 When Brad Edwards -- You know Brad Edwards, I take 9 it, because you mentioned his name several times? 10 A Yes 11 Q When did you first meet Brad Edwards? 12 A Probably four or five years ago. 13 Q Where did you meet him? 14 A At the gym. I'm sorry. He appeared -- He 15 did some work on a case when he was with the Kubicki, 16 Draper firm. It was a personal injury case when he 17 worked for Earleen Cote. 18 Q Was that a case that you were involved in? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Were you on the same side? 21 A No. 22 Q He was opposing counsel? 23 A Defense counsel, yes. 24 Q Do you know what year that was? 25 A Nope. 0012 1 Q About five years ago? 2 A Approximately. 3 Q And then you mentioned something about -- 4 A Wait a minute. Now, that would be probably 5 seven or eight years ago now that I think about it. 6 Sorry. 7 Q And Earleen Coat (pronouncing), is that the 8 name you said? 9 A C-o-t-e. 10 Q She was at the time an attorney at Kubicki, 11 Draper? 12 A Still is. 13 Q How did that case turn out? 14 A I don't even remember what case it was, so 15 I can't tell you how it turned out. 16 Q After that did you have any occasion to 17 communicate with him before he joined RRA? And I'm 18 going to use RRA for your former firm of Rothstein, 19 Rosenfeldt & Adler, if that's okay? 20 A I would see him at the gym from time to 21 time and we would have smalltalk, but that's about 22 it. EFTA01125060 23 Q What gym was that? 24 A It was the, I think it was called The 25 Fitness Company and it was located in the 110 Tower 0013 1 across the street from the Broward County 2 courthouse. 3 Q During the time that you would see him at 4 the gym and have smalltalk occasionally, did you ever 5 have any conversations before or after the gym or did 6 you ever meet with him for social activity? 7 A No. Before he joined the firm, no. Or 8 right before he -- until right before he joined the 9 firm, no. 10 Q From the time that you met him when he 11 worked at Kubicki, Draper, other than seeing him at 12 the gym occasionally, you had no communication with 13 him until he joined the firm, is that correct? 14 A Until soon before he joined the firm, 15 correct. 16 Q Can you tell me, as best as you can recall, 17 how he was recruited or if he was recruited to join 18 the firm? 19 A He was not recruited to join. Well, I'll 20 tell you what happened, because that's subject to 21 interpretation. 22 I received a large verdict in a sexual 23 abuse case in Palm Beach County and it was in the 24 newspaper. Brad called me and said that, I read 25 about your verdict. And he told me that he had some 0014 1 sexual abuse cases as well. 2 And I told him, I said, Let's have lunch, 3 because I was looking for -- I was always on the 4 look-out for lawyers who I would potentially like to 5 work with and bring into the tort practice group at 6 the law firm. And so, we had lunch. 7 Q And was anyone else at the lunch? 8 A Nope. 9 Q What was the case that you got the large 10 verdict in, if you remember? 11 A It was called Doe or Jane Doe, 12 S-i-r-i-w-a-t. 13 Q How large was the verdict? 14 A $24 million. 15 Q Did Christina Kitterman also work on that 16 case? 17 A She brought the case in. She did very 18 little on that file, if anything. I did pretty much 19 all the work. 20 Q So you had lunch with Brad Edwards. Where 21 did you have lunch? 22 A Yolo. 23 Q Can you tell me what the discussion 24 consisted of? 25 A He told me a little bit about his cases, I EFTA01125061 0015 1 told him about my practice group with the law firm 2 and we talked about the possibility of him joining 3 the firm. 4 Q What cases did he tell you he had? 5 A The Jeffrey Epstein cases. 6 Q Do you know how many there were at that 7 time? 8 A I don't recall. 9 Q Were there more than three? 10 A I believe so, but I'm not positive. 11 Q Do you know how any of them were 12 designated, in other words, how they were named in 13 the court files? 14 A We didn't discuss that level of detail. 15 Q What did he tell you the cases -- what did 16 he tell you was the basis of the cases? 17 A He told me that he represented several 18 young girls who were - I'm not sure if he used the 19 word "molested," but that's the word that sticks in 20 my mind - molested by Jeffrey Epstein. 21 Q Did you know who Jeffrey Epstein was at 22 that time? 23 A No. 24 Q Did he explain to you who Jeffrey Epstein 25 was? 0016 1 A Briefly. 2 Q How long did you meet, was it just a lunch 3 hour? 4 A Correct. 5 Q Did he tell you how far along in discovery 6 he was in those cases? 7 A I don't believe so. I think we just spoke 8 about them generally. 9 Q Did he tell you what he thought they were 10 valued at? 11 A I don't think he did, no. 12 Q Prior to that lunch, when you would see him 13 at the gym, did you ever know that he worked on those 14 kinds of cases? 15 A No. I knew that at some point he had left 16 Kubicki, Draper and he was in solo practice, but I 17 didn't know really anything else about what kind of 18 cases he was handling. 19 Q From your experience with him or observing 20 his work at Kubicki, Draper, did you think he was a 21 good lawyer? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Or, did you have an opinion about his legal 24 skills? 25 A It was more that I liked the guy and I 0017 1 thought he was really sharp. I didn't have that many 2 dealings with him during that case that I could, you EFTA01125062  3 know, in order to measure his skills as a lawyer. 4 Q Was it your impression during the lunch 5 meeting with Brad that he might be interested in 6 joining with the firm, with your firm? 7 A At the time, yes. 8 Q Did he tell you he was interested in doing 9 that? 10 A I think he was interested at that point, 11 sure. 12 Q What did you tell him about the prospects 13 of his being offered an opportunity to join your 14 firm? 15 A I believe I told him I'd -- 16 MR. KING: Let me interpose an objection 17 here. If there were any discussions at all 18 relating to compensation then we're going to 19 invoke the financial and privacy privilege. 20 MRS. APRIL: What is that privilege since I 21 cannot find it and I've seen it invoked in Mr. 22 Edwards' deposition. Do you have some authority 23 for that? 24 MR. KING: It is well-recognized that 25 parties have a right to protect financial 0018 1 privilege unless -- financial information unless 2 it is otherwise deemed relevant. And we'll take 3 that position -- 4 THE WITNESS: Well, hold on a second. Let 5 me save you some time, okay? I didn't discuss 6 compensation with him. 7 BY MRS. APRIL: 8 Q I don't think I even asked you that question 9 yet which is why I wanted to go back. 10 A It could have been part of an answer in 11 fairness. 12 MRS. APRIL: I think the objection is 13 premature and in the nature of coaching, with 14 all due respect. So, could you read my question 15 back and maybe you could answer it without 16 disclosing anything that you think is 17 improper. 18 (WHEREUPON, the last question was read 19 back by the court reporter). 20 A I told him I was interested in bringing him 21 in and that he should make an appointment to come in 22 and meet with Rothstein. 23 Q Is that how you left it when you ended your 24 lunch? 25 A I believe so, yes. 0019 1 Q Did you tell Scott Rothstein that you had 2 had a meeting with Brad Edwards? 3 A I'm sure I did at some point, yeah. 4 Q Did you recommend that Scott consider 5 offering him a position? EFTA01125063  6 A Yes. 7 Q What is the next thing you recall about 8 Brad joining the firm, did Brad tell you he made an 9 appointment with Scott? 10 A I don't recall that, but I do recall he 11 joined the firm. 12 Q What month was it or what year and month 13 was it that you had the lunch meeting? 14 A I don't remember. 15 Q Do you know if Brad Edwards joined the firm 16 in 2009? 17 A I don't remember. 18 Q Do you know what day Rothstein, Rosenfeldt 19 & Adler stopped doing business? 20 A Well, we found out that there was a problem 21 on Halloween, October 31st, 2009. The day that the 22 entity formally stopped doing business I'm not clear 23 on, because a Trustee was appointed and then a 24 bankruptcy Trustee was appointed. And I don't know 25 the exact definition of operations, so I can't tell 0020 1 you any more than that. 2 Q Let's use Halloween as close enough. But 3 as a practical matter, you stopped working there on 4 or about Halloween of 2009? 5 A I stayed, I stayed around for a few more 6 weeks because I had to try and wind things up in 7 transition and everything happened very suddenly and 8 it was very shocking to everybody. So, I stayed 9 around for a couple of weeks until I made 10 arrangements to go into solo practice. 11 Q Do you recall testifying at another 12 deposition taken by Charles Lichtman in a case called 13 "In Re: Rothstein, Rosenfeldt a Adler," the 14 bankruptcy case? 15 A Yes. My deposition, yes. 16 Q Do you remember Mr. Lichtman asking you 17 whether you thought that Brad Edwards had joined the 18 firm around June of 2009? 19 A I don't recall that specific question and 20 answer, if you want to show it to me. But if it's in 21 the deposition transcript, I, obviously, was asked 22 about it. 23 Q But you don't actually know when he joined? 24 A I don't recall the specific year that he 25 joined, and I'm being very careful because I'm under 0021 1 oath today. 2 Q Yes, you are. 3 A I really don't know if it was late-'08, 4 early-'09 or what the date was. You probably know 5 about it, though. 6 Q Well, if I told you that I had seen 7 communications between RRA lawyers, including Brad 8 Edwards, that are starting in April of 2009, does EFTA01125064  9 that refresh your memory at all? 10 A With all due respect, you represent Mr. 11 Epstein and I'm not going to take anything that you 12 tell me as the truth, especially if you're not going 13 to be showing me documents. So, don't ask me to 14 confirm communications that you claim to have without 15 showing them to me. I'm not doing that. 16 Q You don't know? Your best recollection is 17 late-'08 or sometime in the early part of '09, is 18 that what / understood your last -- 19 Sir, can I ask you to not -- 20 A Yes. 21 Q If you want to take a break or make phone 22 calls or do whatever you're doing on your phone, I'm 23 fine with that, but I would appreciate your giving us 24 your attention. 25 A I'm sorry. I just told someone to stop 0022 1 texting me, to leave me alone. 2 What was your question? 3 Q You are under oath and this is testimony. 4 MRS. APRIL: You want to read back the 5 last question? 6 (WHEREUPON, the requested testimony was 7 read back by the court reporter). 8 THE WITNESS: I don't have a specific 9 recollection as I sit here today. If I gave a 10 more exact answer under oath in my deposition in 11 a Trustee case then that was my sworn testimony 12 at the time and it is what it is. 13 BY MRS. APRIL: 14 Q You made a comment a moment ago that you 15 don't trust me because I represent Mr. Epstein. Can 16 I ask you what that has to do with whether -- Have 17 you ever met me before today? 18 A It has nothing to do with you personally or 19 even Mr. Epstein. You are taking my deposition in 20 litigation that I am not a party to. 21 Q That's right. 22 A I'm not going to take any lawyer's word 23 that they've seen something that they haven't even 24 shown me to use that as the basis for asking me 25 questions. If you want to ask me about specific 0023 1 documents or communications then show me the 2 document, mark it, and I will answer your questions 3 if I know the answer. 4 Q Have you talked to Brad Edwards about the 5 fact that he has been sued by Jeffrey Epstein in the 6 case that we're here on today, which is Jeffrey 7 Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein and Bradley Edwards, et 8 al? 9 A Yes, briefly. 10 Q What did he say to you and what did you say 11 to him? EFTA01125065 12 A After he was sued, he told me about the 13 lawsuit and that he was being sued. That was about 14 all we talked about at that time. And then I 15 recently spoke with him about my upcoming deposition 16 for the same purpose I just mentioned to his lawyer, 17 because after I was subpoenaed for deposition I 18 called him and told him that I believe that 19 everything that we did at the law firm during the 20 pendency and handling of that case is work-product 21 privilege and I intend to invoke that privilege and 22 refuse to answer any questions encompassed by that 23 privilege unless ordered to do so by the judge. 24 Q You say "that case." What case are you 25 referring to, sir? 0024 1 A What do you mean that case? 2 Q You just made a statement that included a 3 reference, to quote, that case. 4 THE WITNESS: Can you read back my answer, 5 please? 6 (WHEREUPON, the requested testimony was 7 read back by the court reporter). 8 A To answer your question - and I apologize - 9 I was referring to the lawsuits against Jeffrey 10 Epstein that Brad Edwards was handling both before he 11 joined the RRA firm and after. 12 Q Earlier in your testimony you mentioned 13 that you couldn't remember the exact style of those 14 suits or the exact amount, the number of suits. Were 15 there additional suits filed against Jeffrey Epstein 16 by your firm after Brad Edwards joined the firm, 17 whenever that was? 18 A I don't recall, because I had very little 19 involvement in those cases at all. They were Brad's 20 cases when he joined the firm and they remained 21 Brad's cases after he joined the firm. I was merely 22 the head of the Tort Litigation Division and in an 23 administrative capacity. I don't think I did much of 24 anything in any of those Epstein cases, and that's 25 why I don't remember or I cannot tell you about the 0025 1 details you're asking. 2 Q Your position is: If you did talk to Brad 3 Edwards about cases against Jeffrey Epstein during 4 the time that you both worked at BRA that they're 5 subject, those conversations, to a work-product 6 privilege, right? 7 A Absolutely. 8 Q Have you read the complaint or the amended 9 complaint filed by Jeffrey Epstein against Brad 10 Edwards? 11 A No. 12 Q Have you read Brad Edwards' deposition 13 given in that case? 14 A Are you talking about in this case? EFTA01125066 15 Q In this case? 16 A No. 17 Q Did Brad Edwards talk to you at all about 18 questions he was asked during his deposition in this 19 case? 20 A No. 21 Q You mentioned that you had these couple of 22 conversations with Mr. Edwards concerning this case 23 once when he told you he had been sued by Jeffrey 24 Epstein and then more recently when you said you 25 were -- you told him you were going to be deposed? 0026 1 A Correct. 2 Q What did he say to you in response to your 3 remarks? 4 A He just agreed with me that any questions 5 you ask me about any communications, thoughts, 6 discussions or, basically, anything else we did while 7 at the RRA firm handling those cases is work-product 8 privilege. That was it. 9 Q In your view, was the communication that 10 was held between you and Scott Rothstein, Brad 11 Edwards and several other attorneys at a conference 12 in Mr. Rothstein's office where boxes were in the 13 room from the Epstein cases, was that conversation 14 privileged? Do you remember there being such a 15 conversation, let me ask you that? 16 A I'm thinking. I remember a conference in 17 Rothstein's office soon before -- soon before October 18 31st sometime I think during that month. I do not 19 recall boxes from the Epstein case being present. If 20 they were, I didn't -- I wasn't aware of that at the 21 time. But if it was about that case, then it's 22 absolutely work-product privilege. 23 Q Do you remember testifying about the 24 subject matter of the discussion in your deposition 25 taken by Mr. Lichtman in the bankruptcy case? 0027 1 A I don't, but I'm happy to look at what 2 you're referring to if you would like to show it to 3 me. 4 Q I'm going to draw your attention to Page 5 131 and 132 of the deposition of Russell Adler taken 6 October 28th, 2010 by Charles Lichtman. 7 Rather than read it to you, because that 8 would make the record long, I'm going to ask you to 9 start looking at: "Did you have any involvement in 10 any" -- 11 MR. KING: Let me look over your shoulder. 12 You don't have an extra copy, do you? 13 MRS. APRIL: Not that's not marked up. 14 A I've read the portions that you asked me to 15 read and, now, I recall a little more detail. 16 Q Do you remember Scott Rothstein calling you 17 and Mr. Edwards and Gary Farmer and perhaps others EFTA01125067 18 into your office -- 19 A Into his office? 20 0 -- into his office to ask you questions? 21 A Yes. 22 Q And you recall testifying - now that you've 23 looked at this - that you wanted to know about 24 whether or not a particular statute applied to a 25 sexual abuse case? 0028 1 A I remember exactly what I said -- 2 MR. KING: Let me interpose an objection. 3 I didn't mean to cut you off. I want you to 4 complete your answer. 5 A I am not sure if at this point because of 6 my testimony in the Trustee case it is still 7 work-product or not work-product. Suffice it to say, 8 I do remember asking (sic) the questions and 9 answering them to the best of my ability in my 10 deposition on the pages that you referenced and I 11 stand by that testimony. Although, as to this case, 12 I am unsure as to whether or not that is work-product 13 privilege. 14 MR. KING: And we would assert it to the 15 extent that you intend to pursue it. 16 MRS. APRIL: I'm sorry. I didn't 17 understand your -- 18 MR. KING: We would intend to assert the 19 work-product doctrine to the extent that you 20 intend to pursue it beyond the question you just 21 asked relating to whether or not his testimony 22 was his testimony. 23 A And I will point out that that testimony 24 was given in a deposition where I was being sued by 25 the Trustee that stands in the shoes of RRA. And 0029 1 it's my understanding that, by order of Judge Rey, 2 all privileges, work-product, attorney-client are 3 preserved and that's why I am not comfortable 4 testifying openly in this deposition about those 5 dealings and conversations in light of who the 6 parties are in this case. 7 In other words, I still think there is a 8 work-product privilege as to Mr. Epstein. And, if 9 I'm wrong, then the circuit judge in this case can 10 tell me so and order me to tell you more. 11 Q You mentioned that there was an order of 12 Judge Rey in connection with the case where the 13 bankruptcy Trustee sued you and your wife was sued in 14 that case, too, right? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Do you know specifically when that order 17 was entered where Judge Rey said that? 18 A I just have a recollection of knowing that 19 in the main bankruptcy case, of which the adversary 20 case against me was an offshoot, in the main EFTA01125068 21 bankruptcy case there was a ruling that the Trustee 22 stood in the shoes of the law firm and that all 23 privileges were preserved, because I guess that's 24 what happens when a Trustee takes over a law firm. 25 Q Who represented you in that case? 0030 1 A In the bankruptcy adversary case? 2 Q Yes. Did Mr. Haddad represent you there as 3 well? 4 A Mr. Haddad represented me in that and I was 5 also represented by a few other lawyers. 6 Q Do you know who they were? 7 A Jason Slatkin, S-1-a-t-k-i-n, represented 8 me for most of the case. Before him, Tom Messana, 9 M-e-s-s-a-n-a, represented me. 10 Q Well, let me ask you this: Now that you've 11 looked at these couple of pages, irrespective of 12 work-product privilege, do you recall that Scott had 13 Epstein files in his office at the meeting you 14 described? 15 A I recalled it at the prior deposition that 16 you have shown me and I now recall it a little better 17 from reading it. 18 Q So there were Epstein boxes in Scott's 19 room? 20 A Apparently, in his office. Apparently, 21 there were and that's what I testified to in my prior 22 deposition. 23 Q Today I'm asking you, do you remember -- 24 How did you know they were Epstein files? 25 That's a different question. It wasn't asked before. 0031 1 A Frankly, I don't remember how I recalled 2 that they were Epstein files. I mean, do 3 specifically recall looking at the labels on it or 4 maybe there was writing on the boxes that they were 5 in? I just don't recall those details. I'm sorry. 6 Q When you're talking about boxes, are you 7 referring to standard sort of banker's box that law 8 firms keep files in? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Do you know whether there were a large 11 number of boxes or a small number? 12 A I don't remember whether or not I counted 13 the boxes. I probably didn't. 14 Q Do you think there were more than two? 15 A Probably. 16 Q Do you think there could have been as many 17 as 19? 18 A I really don't know. I am not comfortable 19 even giving an approximation under oath concerning 20 the number, the specific number of boxes. 21 Q So you have no idea whether there were -- 22 Do you know how they were set up in the room; were 23 they on the table, on the floor, on the credenza? EFTA01125069 24 A I just remember seeing boxes on the 25 floor. 0032 1 Q Were they stacked up on the floor or were 2 they spread around so that one could -- 3 A I do not have that level of detail in my 4 recollection. I'm sorry. 5 Q Were you surprised that the boxes were in 6 Scott's office? 7 A I was either surprised or perplexed, or 8 both. 9 Q Do you recall if anybody who was in 10 attendance at that time looked at any papers in the 11 boxes, including Scott? 12 A During that meeting? 13 Q Yes. 14 A I don't think anyone -- I don't recall 15 seeing anyone pull anything out of boxes and start 16 looking through files at that meeting. We sat at a 17 table and there was a discussion. 18 Q Now, I'm a little unclear about the 19 position you're taking on work-product or whether 20 it's waived or whether it's preserved, so I'm going 21 to ask you some questions. And if you think there's 22 some privilege, I'm sure you'll tell me. 23 A Okay. 24 Q Did Scott Rothstein tell you during that 25 meeting that the questions that he was asking you had 0033 1 something to do with the Epstein cases? 2 MR. KING: We'll assert the work-product 3 doctrine to any conversations occurring during 4 the course of that meeting. 5 A But as to whether they pertain to Epstein 6 at all -- 7 HR. KING: Because even the failure to 8 associate a particular statement with a 9 conversation could have significance from a 10 work-product standpoint, so we'll assert the 11 work-product doctrine. 12 A And so will I. I'll leave it up to the 13 judge, although you do have my sworn testimony from 14 the other case in front of you. 15 Q Let me ask you this: Without answering the 16 question, because this will make a difference as to 17 whether we need to come back after the judge rules. 18 A Yes. 19 Q Do you know the answer to that question? 20 In other words, you're not telling it to me, but do 21 you remember if he said that at all or are you 22 allowed to tell me that? 23 A I'm just saying that, as I sit here today, 24 I don't have a clear recollection of that specific 25 matter. I think it might be covered in my answers in 0034 EFTA01125070  1 the prior deposition from what you showed me. I have 2 not reviewed the entire deposition, for the record. 3 You directed me to two pages of my prior deposition 4 and those are the only two pages that I looked at. 5 And that deposition, I think we said this already, 6 was taken on -- 7 Q Six months ago almost. October? 8 A Six months ago. October 28th, 2010. 9 Q A week short of six months. 10 Have you ever read the transcript of the 11 deposition that you gave in that case on October 28, 12 2010? 13 A Soon after I got a copy of the transcript, 14 I did. 15 Q Do you recall sitting here today who else 16 was in the room? At that time you said the Tort 17 Group, including Brad Edwards, Gary Farmer and maybe 18 Steve Jaffe. Do you recall whether Steve Jaffe was 19 there? 20 A I have no greater recollection today than I 21 did at the time of my deposition. So if that's what 22 I said in my deposition, that's the best answer I 23 can -- that's better than the answer that I can give 24 you today, to tell you the truth. 25 Q On Page 132 of that deposition -- Excuse 0035 1 me. Strike that. 2 Do you recall, did you testify -- Since 3 October 31st, 2009, have you testified in any other 4 lawsuits, you, as a witness? 5 A No. Other than the adversary case against 6 me, no. 7 R Have you settled that case? 8 A Yes. 9 Q So let me be clear on this, because I do 10 not know that it would be fruitful to go through a 11 dozen or more questions that you are going to claim 12 work-product to: It's your position that anything 13 that occurred during the time that RRA existed where 14 you talked to other lawyers in the firm in any way, 15 shape, or form about Jeffrey Epstein is subject to 16 work-product privilege? 17 A Correct. That's my understanding. 18 Q So I'm going to reserve the right to ask 19 you those questions when we have a ruling from the 20 court. We believe there's been a waiver, and you're 21 telling me you don't know or you're not sure there's 22 been a waiver? 23 A As I understand waivers of the work-product 24 doctrine, I am personally of the opinion that there 25 has not been a waiver at all. Hy prior deposition 0036 1 was compelled testimony that was given by way of a 2 subpoena in a case in which I was a defendant and I 3 had to answer those questions when asked by a EFTA01125071  4 bankruptcy Trustee who stood in the shoes of the law 5 firm. I don't think that that constitutes any waiver 6 of the work-product privilege, especially as to the 7 person who was a defendant in those underlying 8 lawsuits and that's the person who you represent in 9 this case. 10 So that's my understanding, that's my 11 position that I'm taking. If the circuit judge 12 disagrees with me and he enters an order, I will do 13 what I'm ordered to do by the judge. But I say that 14 in an abundance of caution as well and in good faith, 15 of course. 16 Q You're not saying that the subpoena that 17 was delivered to you by giving it to your lawyer in 18 this case is less of a subpoena, are you? 19 You said you were compelled in that case 20 because you got a subpoena. Are you treating this 21 subpoena differently? This is a lawsuit. 22 A I know it's a lawsuit. 23 Q We issued a subpoena. Do you feel you were 24 not subpoenaed to testify truthfully and fully today? 25 A I don't know what you're talking about. I 0037 1 know what a subpoena is. I am here testifying under 2 oath. 3 Q Pursuant to the subpoena? 4 A Pursuant to a subpoena. I do not have the 5 documents that you are requesting. If they exist, 6 they're in the hands of the bankruptcy Trustee, so 7 talk to him. 8 Q Sir, thank you. I know how to talk to and 9 who to talk to. 10 A Okay. 11 Q My question to you is: You made a 12 statement a moment ago that you testified in a 13 certain way on October 28th, 2010 because you were 14 compelled by virtue of a subpoena in a case where you 15 were a party and the bankruptcy Trustee -- you were 16 required to give testimony. 17 Do you think that the subpoena that was 18 served today is any different? Do you think you're 19 not required to give testimony when asked? 20 A In the sense that I am required to give 21 pursuant to a subpoena, it's the same thing. It's 22 just that the parties are very different in this case 23 than they were in the adversary case against me. 24 Q Sir, you've been practicing how long? 25 A 24-and-a-half years. 0038 1 Q In 24-and-a-half years you have served 2 subpoenas on witnesses and parties? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Is there some distinction on whether or not 5 a person has to testify truthfully and fully 6 depending on whether they're a party and who is suing EFTA01125072  7 who? 8 A I have told you my position in this case 9 very clearly as to the reasons behind my assertion of 10 the work-product privilege and my reasons why I don't 11 believe it has been waived. Any further questions 12 from you about my serving subpoenas and what 13 subpoenas mean, quite honestly, is badgering and it's 14 a waste of time. And I would request that you move 15 on and ask me other questions, because this is just 16 absolutely -- there's no purpose behind this 17 questioning other than to badger me. 18 Q Let's go back to your conversations with 19 Brad Edwards before he joined the firm. 20 A Yes. 21 Q I had asked you questions before. Let's 22 pick up there. 23 You had a lunch with Brad Edwards sometime 24 before he joined the firm and you're not sure when 25 that was, but can you tell me this: Following your 0039 1 lunch, do you know if Brad Edwards joined the firm? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Do you know whether it was a period of a 4 long stretch of time before he joined the firm or was 5 it a month or six months or a year? Can you tell me 6 approximately how long after you had that lunch that 7 he joined the firm? 8 A I don't recall. I'm sorry. 9 Q Was it a year? 10 A I don't recall. I'm sorry. 11 Q You have no recollection? 12 A It was less than a year. 13 Q All right. 14 A Okay. 15 Q Did you meet with him on any other 16 occasions for any reason to talk about a case, for 17 social reasons or otherwise, between the lunch at 18 Yolo's and his walking into the firm and saying I 19 work here now? 20 A I don't believe so. 21 Q Did he call you, e-mail you, or otherwise 22 communicate with you between the time of that lunch 23 and his becoming employed by RRA? 24 A I don't recall. 25 Q You don't recall. Do you have in your 0040 1 possession anywhere e-mails, hand notes written on 2 napkins or otherwise that would refresh your 3 recollection about the answer to that question? 4 A I might have copies of some e-mails. But, 5 if I do, I don't think I have any e-mail attachments 6 and I would certainly have no record of phone calls I 7 don't think. 8 Q When you say you might have some e-mails, 9 is that because you maintained e-mails on a personal EFTA01125073 10 computer at home or are these e-mails that belonged 11 to the firm that you retrieved? 12 A I think I took a copy of some e-mails 13 before I physically left RRA. 14 Q Did you review those e-mails prior to 15 coming here today to see if any of them were 16 responsive to my subpoena? 17 A No. 18 Q And that's because you believed they were 19 not or you didn't think of it, or what? 20 A Didn't think of it, to be honest with 21 you. 22 Q Did you give Brad Edwards your e-mail 23 address at some point before he joined the firm? 24 A 25 Q Did you hand him a business card? 0041 1 A I don't specifically recall doing that, but 2 any lawyer can find any other lawyer's e-mail address 3 these days. 4 Q Well, did you send any e-mails to Brad? 5 A Just so we're clear here, the requests in 6 the subpoena in the duces tecum section keep asking 7 about written communications. 8 Q And you think an e-mail is not written? 9 A That is like some esoteric issue that I 10 really don't waste my time thinking about. Written 11 communications to me mean letters, notes, handwritten 12 stuff, printed, typed, things like that. 13 Q If you look at the subpoena on Page 5 14 there's something called "definitions." Number 2, 15 written Communications. 16 Sir, did you read the instructions in 17 definitions before you reviewed the subpoena? 18 A I don't recall. 19 Q If I say to you that the instructions on 20 this subpoena, that you're choosing not to look at, 21 says: 22 "Number 2. Written communications means any 23 documents evidencing communications between you and 24 another person or persons of any kind," would that 25 include an e-mail? 0042 1 A Let's put it this way, I will agree to go 2 back and look at the back-up I took to see if I have 3 anything that's responsive and that I do not feel was 4 privileged. And if I come across any such e-mails, I 5 will print those and produce those to you with a copy 6 to Brad's lawyer. 7 Q And, sir, if you determine that they are 8 privileged, will you let us know that they exist so 9 that we can deal with that at such time as the 10 privileged question is ruled upon? 11 A Sure. 12 Q Thank you. EFTA01125074 13 I think you've testified, and I know that 14 Mr. King has objected, but I think your testimony to 15 a question I had not yet gotten to was that you 16 didn't know, but let me make it clear. Do you know 17 what salary and benefits were offered to Brad Edwards 18 when he joined RRA? 19 A No. 20 Q Do you know what salary and/or benefits he 21 received when he did join RRA? 22 A No. Other people handled that part of