EFTA00611281.pdf

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No. 50 2009CA040800XXXXMB AG JEFFREY EPSTEIN Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendants. EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS EDWARDS'S COUNTERCLAIM Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(b), moves to dismiss the Counterclaim for abuse of process filed by Defendant, Bradley J. Edwards ("Edwards"), and states: 1. On December 21, 2009, Edwards answered the Complaint filed by Epstein and asserted a Counterclaim (attached as Exhibit A). 2. Epstein filed a Motion for More Definite Statement and Motion to Dismiss Edwards's Counterclaim as it was unclear what cause of action Edwards was attempting to assert. 3. On January 26, 2010, the Court entered an order (attached as Exhibit B) reflecting that "upon stipulation of counsel [ I, the claim is solely an abuse of process claim." 4. Edwards's Counterclaim fails to state an action for abuse of process. Specifically, Edwards fails to allege any wrongful act or misuse of process after the initial process was issued. EFTA00611281 Epstein v. Rothstein. et al. Case No. 50 2009CA040800XXXXMB AG Epstein's Motion to Dismiss Edwards's Counterclaim Page 2 of 4 5. The crux of Edwards's counterclaim is that Epstein filed the instant action "for the sole purpose of further attempting to intimidate Edwards, L.M., and others into abandoning or settling their legitimate claims for less than their just and reasonable value." See Counterclaim ¶9. In addition, Edwards alleges that "...Epstein has ignored the statutory requirement for written notice prior to the initiation of a civil theft claim." Id. ¶10. 6. These allegations fall short of stating a cause of action for abuse of process. Florida courts have repeatedly held that the act constituting misuse of the process must occur after process was issued. See Whitney Information Network. Inc. v. Gagnon, 353 F.Supp.2d 1208, 1212 (M.D. Fla. 2005) (dismissing abuse of process claim where count "merely alleges that plaintiffs filed the lawsuit for a variety of improper or unlawful purposes, and [failed] to allege any post-issuance abuse of process."); McMurray v. U-Haul Co.. Inc. 425 So. 2d 1208, 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (finding that while appellants' alleged complaint was filed for a multitude of improper purposes such as to coerce settlement of appellant's debt, appellants failed to state a cause of action for abuse of process because they failed to alleged an act which constituted misuse of the process after it was issued). 7. Additionally, the allegation that Epstein filed the claims against Edwards to intimidate him is inapposite. In Marty v. Gresh 501 So. 2d 87, 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), the court found while certain pre-process events may suggest a malicious intent, "the maliciousness or lack of foundation of the asserted cause of action itself is actually irrelevant to the tort of abuse of process." (Internal citation omitted). Moreover, the EFTA00611282 Epstein v. Rothstein. et al Case No. 50 2009CA040800=0(MB AG Epstein's Motion to Dismiss Edwards's Counterclaim Page 3 of 4 court noted that the facts alleged "speak to pre-process rather than post-process events, and hence fail to advance appellee's cause of action for abuse of process." Id. (Emphasis in original). See also Della-Donna v. Nova University, Inc. 512 So. 2d 1051, 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (holding that plaintiff failed to state an abuse of process claim since there was no allegation of misuse of process after it was issued; filing a lawsuit with ulterior motive of harassment does not constitute abuse of process); 8. Equally unavailing is Edwards's allegation that Epstein ignored the prior written notice requirement to initiate a civil theft claim. See Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Ferre, 636 F.Supp. 970, 974-75 (S.D. Fla. 1985) (holding that defendants' allegations that plaintiffs abused process by commencing lawsuit and failing to follow procedures under Florida Public Record Act before lawsuit was commenced failed to state a claim for abuse of process "as neither involves the requisite allegation of post-issuance [abuse of process])." Nevertheless, Epstein was not required to give written notice as he did not assert a cause of action under Fla. Stat. §772.11, which requires a pre-suit written demand. 9. Edwards has failed to allege any misuse of process after the instant lawsuit was filed and served. Accordingly, Edwards has failed to state a cause of action for abuse of process and his Counterclaim must therefore be dismissed WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, requests the Court dismiss Defendant's, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, Counterclaim for abuse of process and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. EFTA00611283 Epstein v. Rothstein. et al. Case No. 50 2009CA040800XXXXMB AG Epstein's Motion to Dismiss Edwards's Counterclaim Page 4 of 4 Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees on this 26th day of February , 2010: Gary M. Farmer, Jr., Esq. Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. & Lehrman, PL 250 Australian Avenue South 425 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Suite 1400 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 954-524-2820 Fax: 561-835-8691 954-524-2822 - fax Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Attorneys for Defendant, L.M. Jack Scarola, Esq. Law Offices of Marc S. Nurik Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Counsel to Scott Rothstein Shipley, P.A One East Broward Boulevard, Suite 700 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 West Palm Beach, FL 33409 (954) 745-5849 686-6300 (954) 745-3556F 383-9424 F Attorneys for Defendant Bradley Edwards BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP 303 Banyan Boulevard Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 842-2820 (561) 253-t74 Fax R bert D. Critton, Jr. Florida Bar #224162 M.chael J. Pike Florida Bar #617296 (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00611284 12/21/2000 14:07 FAX 56168/5616 SEARCY DENNEY Wool ( IN ME CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR. PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN. Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendants, ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM ORDEFENDANT, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS Defendant, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, by and through his undersigned attorneys Ides his Answer and Counterclaim to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, in the above-styled matter on December 7, 2009 as follows: ANSWER GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 and demands strict proof thereof 2. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 2. 3. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 3. 4. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 4. EXHIBIT ny, 21 EFTA00611285  SEARCY DENNEY Dot ' 11/21/2000 14:06 FAX 5815845816 Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Counterclaim of Edwards Page 2 of 16 the 5. Defendant, EDWARDS, Is without knowledge to either admit or deny tions and demands strict allegations contained in Paragraph 5 and thereby denies these allega proof thereof. in Broward 6. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that he is an individual residing of Florida, otherwise Defendant, County, Florida and is licensed to practice law in the State Paragraph 6 and demands strict EDWARDS, denies the balance of the allegations contained in proof thereof. individual residing in 7. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that Defendant, L.M. is an RDS in a civil lawsuit against Palm Beach County, Florida represented by RRA and EDWA represented by RRA. Otherwise Epstein, and is now represented by EDWARD$ but no longer contained in Paragraph 7 including Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the balance of the allegations represented by ROTHSTEIN and demands but not limited to the allegation that L.M. was ever strict prooftheieof a Florida Professional S. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that non-party RRA was Olas Boulevard, Suite 1650, Ft. Service Corporation, with a principal address of 401 East Las lawsuits on behalf of clients in Palm Lauderdale, FL 33401, and it conducted business and filed lawsuit on behalf of L.M., nor did it file Beach County, Florida; however, RRA never filed a Those lawsuits were filed by EDWARDS lawsuits on behalf of other victims against EPSTEIN. Otherwise Defendant, EDWARDS, denies prior to any association with or knowledge of RRA. and demands strict proof thereof. the balance of the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 EFTA00611286  QI003 12/21/2009 14:08 FAX 5816845811 SEARCY DENNEY of Edwards Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Couptetalaire Page 3 of 16 e to either admit or deny the 9. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg t eby denies these allegations and demands stric allegations contained in Paragraph 9 and ther proof thereof. held itself out as legitimately and 10. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that RRA otherwise Defendant, EDWARDS is without properly engaging in the practice of law, h 10 end nce of the allegations contained in Paragrap knowledge to either admit or deny the bala strict proof thereof. thereby denies these allegations and demands e to eithe r admit or deny the 11. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg ands strict thereby denies these allegations and dem allegations contained in Paragraph 11 and proof thereof. ledge to either admit or deny the 12. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without know ands strict thereby denies these allegations and dem allegations contained in Paragraph 12 and proof thereof ledge to either admit or deny the 13. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without know ands strict thereby denies these allegations and dem allegations contained in Paragraph 13 and proof thereof. e to either admit or deny the 14. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg strict thereby denies these allegations and demands allegations contained hi Paragraph 14 and proof thereof. e to either admit or deny the 15. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg strict thereby denies these allegations and demands allegations contained in Paragraph 15 and proof thereof. EFTA00611287  lb004 12/21/2009 14:08 FAX 5818845818 SEARCY DENNEY s Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Counterclaim of Edward papa or 16 deny the 16. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledge to either admit or allega tions and demands strict allegations contained in Paragraph 16 and thereby denies these proof thereof. Paragr aph 17. 17. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 18 and 18. Defendant, EDWARDS. denies the allegations contained in demands strict proof thereof. or deny the 19. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledge to either admit allegations and demands strict allegations contained in Paragraph 19 and thereby denies these proof thereof. admit or deny the 20. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledge to either allega tions and demands strict allegations contained in Paragraph 20 and thereby denies these proof thereof. deny the 21. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledge to either admit or allegations and demands strict allegations contained in Paragraph 21 and thereby denies those proof thereof. or deny the 22. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledge to either admit allegations and demands strict allegations contained in Paragraph 22 and thereby denies these proof thereof. against Epstein was 23. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that the identity of claimants of Paragraph 23 arc denied and shielded through the use of initials. All other allegations Defendant demands strict proof thereof. EFTA00611288  SEARCY DENNEY (boos 12/21/2000 14:09 FAX 3818845816 im of Edwards Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Countercla Page 5 of 16 esented claimants against Epstein on 24. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that he repr t grap h 24 are denied and Defendant demands stric behalf of RRA. All other allegations of Para proof thereof. e to either adroit or deny the 25. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg t thereby denies these allegations and demands stric allegations contained in Paragraph 25 and proof thereof. contained in Paragraph 26 and 26. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations demands strict proof thereof. s contained in Paragraph 27 and 27. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation demands strict proof thereof. e to either admit or deny the 28. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg against except that EDWARDS admits the evidence allegations contained in Paragraph 28 Epstein was, in fact, real. e to either admit or deny the 29. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg strict thereby denies these allegations and demands allegations contained in Paragraph 29 and proof thereof. e to either admit or deny the 30. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg strict thereby denies these allegations and demands allegations contained in Paragraph 30 and proof thereof e to either admit or deny the 31. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg that he pt that EDWARDS specifically denies allegations contained in Paragraph 31 exce of the alleged unethical or illegal conduct engaged in or had knowledge of any EFTA00611289  SEARCY DENNEY X006 12/21/2000 14:09 FAX 5618845810 in ofEdwards Epstein V. Rothstein: Answer and CoosucteM Pate 6 of 16 e to either admit or deny the 32. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg pt that EDWARDS specifically denies that he allegations contained in Paragraph 32 exce the alleged unethical or illegal conduct engaged in or had knowledge of any of e to either admit or deny the 33. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg pt that EDWARDS specifically denies that he allegations contained in Paragraph 33 exce alleged unethical or illegal conduct engaged in or had knowledge of any of the e to either admit or deny the 34. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg ands strict and thereby denies these allegations and dem allegations contained in Paragraph 34 proof thereof. ledge to either admit or deny the 35. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without know pt that EDWARDS specifically denies that he allegations contained in Paragraph 35 exce alleged unethical or illegal conduct. engaged in or had knowledge of any of the he deposed three of Epstein's pilots, and 36. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that of the allegations t, otherwise Defendant denies the balance sought the deposition of a fourth pilo proof thereof. of Paragraph 36 and demands strict ledge to either admit or deny the 37. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without know t ther eby denies these allegations and demands stric allegations contained in Paragraph 37 and proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 38, except 38. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits the alleg subpoena Tommy Mamie. that EDWARDS denies that he sought to EFTA00611290  V1007 16 SEARCY DENNEY 12/21/2009 14:09 FAX 50108458 tercla im of ?Awards Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Coun Page 7 of 16 e to either admit or deny the 39. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without knowledg strict thereby denies these allegations and demands allegations contained in Paragraph 39 and proof thereof. ained in Paragraph 40. 40. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits the allegations cont ations contained in Paragraph 41 and 41. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. s ained in Paragraph 42 (a) and 42. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation cont er Russell Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that he, Berg and (b) and demands strict proof thereof. e Defendant, all attended Epstein's deposition, otherwis Adler (another named partner in RRA) ndant, ations contained in Paragraph 42 (c). Defe EDWARDS, denies the balance of the alleg t proof contained in Paragraph 42 (d) and demands stric EDWARDS, denies the allegations allegations contained in Paragraph 42 (e) and thereof. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the rt on July ands stric t proo f ther eof, exce pt that EDWARDS admits that he addressed the Cou dem ial transcript of that 2009 , and the best evid ence of the content of his statements is the offic 31, raining admits that he filed a Motion for Injunction Rest proceeding. Defendant, EDWARDS, of t of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property Fraudulent Transfer of Assets, Appointmen v. Epstein, to Secure Potential Judgment, in Jane Doe Epstein, and to Post a S15 million Bond Defendant, on. The motion was reported in the press. Case No. 0S-CV-80893-Marra/Johns ained in was denied. The balance of the allegations cont EDWARDS, admits that the motion t, ndant demands strict proof thereof. Defendan Paragraph 42 (f) are denied and Defe d in Paragraph r admit or deny the allegations containe EDWARDS, is without knowledge to eithe t, s and demands strict proof thereof. Defendan 42 (g) and thereby denies these allegation EFTA00611291  '&08 SEARCY DENNEY 12/21/2009 14:10 FAX 5816845818 Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Countercla im of Edwards Page B of 16 f ained in Paragraph 42 (b) and demands strict proo EDWARDS, denies the allegations cont the allegations contained in Paragraph 42 (i) and thereof. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies t, ARDS, admits the allegations contained in demands strict proof thereof. Defendan EDW the is without knowledge to either admit or deny Paragraph 42 (j). Defendant, EDWARDS, strict thereby denies these allegations and demands allegations contained in Paragraph 42 (k) and and they knew the S, admits that they knew what it said proof thereof. Defendant, EDWARD Civil Actions. impact whatsoever on the three pending civil provisions in the agreement bad no im to resolve isions in the NPA was to allow an alleged vict The concept behind certain civil prov move on with her complete privacy and anonymity and a civil claim with Epstein, maintain her deny the is without knowledge to either admit or life, otherwise, Defendant, EDWARDS, nce of the graph 42 (I) and therefore denies the bala balance of the allegations contained in Para (I) and demands strict proof thereof. allegations contained in Paragraph 42 ledge to either admit or deny the 43. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without know strict thereby denies these allegations and demands allegations contained in Paragraph 43 and proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 44 and 44. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. s contained in Paragraph 45 and 45. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation demands strict proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 46 and 46. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. EFTA00611292  Zoog SEARCY DENNEY 12/21/2000 14:10 VAX 5610045010 — aimof Edwards Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Countercl Page 90[16 . gave a sworn taped statement to the 47. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that L.M ent of l proceedings. The best evidence of the cont FBI and a subsequent deposition in the civi these statements is the transcript of each. ations contained in Paragraph 48 and 48. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof ations contained in Paragraph 49 and 49. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 50 and 50. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. s contained in Paragraph 51 and 51. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation demands strict proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 52 and 52. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. s contained in Paragraph 53 and 53. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation demands strict proof thereof. lorida Civil Remedies for Criminal 72,101 et seq„. Fla. Stat—FDefe covet —violation a 667Piau ndants i:vs Act—Against All hs es the allegations contained in Paragrap 54. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits or deni 1.53 as previously set forth herein. ations contained in Paragraph 55 and 55. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. EFTA00611293  la 010 SEARCY DENNEY 12/21/2009 14:10 FAX 5818845815, Edwards Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Counterclaim of Page 10 of 16 ations contained in Paragraph 56 and 56. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 57 and 57. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. s contained in Paragraph 58 and 58. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation demands strict proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 59 and 59. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. teer Influenced and Comet Orawdzation Act" Count 11—Florida RICO—"Racke Aaainst All Defendants Pursuant to §6895.01, et sect.. Fla, Stat. (2O91. hs es the allegations contained in Paragrap 60. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits or deni in. 1-53 and 55-59 as previously set forth here ns contained in Paragraph 61 and 61. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegatio demands strict proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 62 and 62. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. ns contained in Paragraph 63 and 63. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegatio demands strict proof thereof. ledge to either admit or deny the 64. Defendant, EDWARDS, is without know of the filing pt Defendant, EDWARDS, admits that as allegations contained in Paragraph 64 exce rwise been brought against ROTHSTEIN, othe of this Complaint, criminal charges have only EFTA00611294  C6011 12/21/2009 14:10 FAX 5616845816. SEARCY DENNEY Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Counterclaim of Edwards Pitgellof10 contained in Paragraph 64 and Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the balance of the allegations demands strict proof thereof. in Paragr aph 65 and 65. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained demands strict proof thereof. Paragr aph 66 and 66. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained in demands strict proof thereof. aph 67 and 67. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained in Paragr demands strict proof thereof. Paragraph 68 and 68. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained in demands strict proof thereof. Count El—Abuse of Process—Against All Defendanta Defendant, EDWARDS, admits or denies the allega tions contained in Paragraphs 69. 1.53, 55-59 and 61-68 as previously set forth herein. Paragraph 70 and 70. Defendant. EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained in demands strict proof thereof. Paragraph 71 and 71. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained in demands strict proof thereof. raph 72 and 72. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations contained in Parag demands strict proof thereof. Count 1V—Fraud—Against All Defendants ned in Paragraphs 73. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits or denies the allegations contai . 1-53, 55-59, 61-68 and 70-72 as previously set forth herein EFTA00611295  10 SEARCY DENNEY 12/21/2009 14:11 FAX 50108458 int ofEdwards Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Cotmtervia Page 12 of 16 ained in Paragraph 74 and 74. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations cont demands strict proof thereof. ained in Paragraph 75 and 75. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegations cont demands strict proof thereof. Defendants Conspiracy to CommitFraud—.Aninsi All allegations contained in Paragraphs 76. Defendant, EDWARDS, admits or denies the prev iously set fotth herein. 1-53, 55-59, 61-68, 70-72 and 74-75 as s contained In Paragraph 77 and 77. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation demands strict proof thereof. s contained in Paragraph 78 and 78. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the allegation demands strict proof thereof. ations contained in Paragraph 79 and 79. Defendant, EDWARDS, denies the alleg demands strict proof thereof. ersigned attorneys to defend this 80. Defendant, EDWARDS, has retained the und to pay them a reasonable fee and costs. action against him and has agreed d are denied. 81. All allegations not otherwise expressly addresse claims against him, EDWARDS demands WHEREFORE, having fully answered the isions cost s pursuant to the prevailing party prov judgment in his favor and an award of fees arid h Epstein has brought his claims. of the applicable statutes pursuant to whic COUNTERCLAIM tein (EPSTEIN) and alleges: Bradley J. Edwards (EDWARDS) sues Jeffrey Eps EFTA00611296  lb 013 SEARCY DENNEY 12/21/2009 14:11 FAX 5610845810 Epstein v. Rothstein: Answer and Counter claim* of Ed