EFTA00793401.pdf

Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 1 of 97 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION www.fisb.uscourts.gov IN RE: CASE NO. 09-34791-RBR ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, P.A., CHAPTER 11 Debtor. JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S EXPEDITED MOTION TO BE EXCUSED FROM ATTENDING SHOW CAUSE HEARING (In order to grant effective relief Expedited Hearing Requested on or before October 24, 2018, so that the Court may rule prior to the October 26, 2018, hearing) Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") moves the Court, on an expedited basis, to be excused from attending the October 26, 2018, show cause hearing, and states: INTRODUCTION On April 20, 2018, this Court entered its Order to Show Cause (the "Show Cause Order") why Fowler White and Epstein should not be held in contempt and scheduled an evidentiary show cause hearing for August 23 and 24, 2018. (D.E. 6366.) The hearing was reset to October 26, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. (D.E. 6431.) In its Show Cause Order, the Court ordered Epstein to sit for a limited deposition and to attend the show cause hearing in person. (D.E. 6366.) Epstein respectfully requests to be excused from attending the show cause hearing because his deposition was taken on October 13, 2018, for a period of two hours and Epstein has filed a Declaration in support of his position.' There is nothing left to add to Epstein's testimony and it would be unnecessary and duplicative to require Epstein, who resides in the U.S. Virgin Islands, to travel to Florida for the hearing. 'Epstein's deposition transcript and Declaration are attached as Exhibits A and B, respectively. EFTA00793401  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 2 of 97 There are no disputed facts material to this show cause proceeding regarding Epstein. The Movants in these show cause proceedings (Farmer Jaffe, Bradley J. Edwards and L.M.) have acknowledged that Epstein did not have the disc or even know of the disc's existence before being advised by Link & Rockenbach in February 2018. Further, Epstein has testified that he only received select documents from the disc in February 2018. The select documents were provided to Epstein after Link & Rockenbach located the disc in Fowler White's boxes in February 2018. Because there are no material facts in dispute, live testimony will have no impact on this Court's determination of whether there was a violation by Epstein of the November 2010 Agreed Order. As this Court will see, there is not a shred of evidence that Epstein knew about the disc before learning about it from Link & Rockenbach in February 2018. Movants' position is that Epstein violated the November 2010 Agreed Order because Link & Rockenbach — Epstein's "agent" -- found the disc in 2018 and provided select copies of documents from it to Epstein. This Court has already ruled that everything post Link & Rockenbach is not a violation of the November 2010 Agreed Order but, rather, is a State Court issue, and will not be considered at the Show Cause hearing. Therefore, there is no further live testimony that can be elicited from Epstein that would benefit the Court in deciding if Epstein violated the November 2010 Agreed Order. Epstein respectfully requests to be excused from personally attending the Show Cause hearing. Epstein will be represented at the hearing by his counsel, Chad Pugatch and Scott J. Link. ARGUMENT A. What Happened to the Disc in 2018 is Not a Violation of This Court's November 2010 Agreed Order. The Court was clear that issues relating to what happened after Link & Rockenbach found the disc in 2018 are State Court issues and not to be considered in the Show Cause proceedings. 2 EFTA00793402  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 3 of 97 EDWARDS: ... The representation was made on the record by Mr. Link that he provided it within his law firm and his client, that being Mr. Epstein. When further asked by the court, has Mr. Epstein been provided with copies of the documents, or the contents of these privileged documents? Mr. Link replied, I just said my client, my law firm and my client, and I can saw legal counsel, Mr. Goldberger. So, that's it. So we now know that this information that was improperly obtained was disseminated not only to Mr. Epstein, the adversary who now has this information, it was also --- COURT: Take that up in the state court. (Apr. Tr. 39:15-40:3.) 2 SCAROLA: Your Honor has made repeated reference to being permitted to inquire of Mr. Epstein about his possession of the disk. Your Honor's order related not only to the electronic documents, but related as well to any copies of the documents that were made. Mr. Link has made it clear in his representations to your Honor today, and he has stated previously that he sent copies of the privileged documents to Mr. Epstein. Mr. Epstein, we know, retained those documents, and retention of those documents is a clear violation of your Honor's order. What we would like to be able to inquire about, in addition to whether Mr. Epstein had possession of the disk, is whether Mr. Epstein had possession of copies of any of the information obtained from that disk, including the e-mail --- COURT: But the disc wasn't discovered until Link found it in the 36 boxes. SCAROLA: Well, yes, sir, that's what has been represented to the Court, but what Mr. Link has said is that he transferred that information to Mr. Epstein. COURT: After he found it. SCAROLA: Well, he obviously couldn't transfer it before. COURT: But that's what you're litigating in state court. SCAROLA: No, sir, I'm sorry, that's not what we're litigating in state court. What we are litigating in state court is the malicious prosecution claim. What we want to be able to litigate before your Honor is violation of this Court's order, and retention of documents obtained from that disk is a clear violation of your Honor's order. 2The April 13, 2018, hearing transcript (D.E. 6367) shall be referred to as "Apr. Tr." 3 EFTA00793403  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 4 of 97 COURT: I disagree with you. .... Take that up in your state court litigation. (Apr. Tr. 43:19-45:6.) B. Epstein has Provided Sworn Testimony and His Attendance at the Show Cause Hearing is Not Necessary. The Court allowed Movants to take Epstein's deposition limited to the issue of his knowledge and possession of the disc. (Apr. Tr. 36:2-9.) The Show Cause Order also provided for the filing of sworn declarations. (D.E. 6366,91 5 i.v.) Specifically, it provides: Unless otherwise ordered, the direct testimony of each witness, except adverse, hostile or rebuttal witnesses, shall be presented by sworn declarations consisting of a succinct written statement of the direct testimony which that witness would be prepared to give if questions were propounded in the usual fashion at the Show Cause Hearing. ... *** Objections to any portions of the statements may be raised at the time the sworn declaration of each respective witness is offered to the Court. The witness shall then be sworn and asked if the statement correctly reflects the testimony that would be given if the witness was asked the appropriate questions. Assuming an affirmative answer, opposing counsel may then cross-examine the witness. At the conclusion of cross-examination, the party whose witness is on the stand may conduct oral redirect examination in the usual manner. Id. Well before his deposition was taken, Epstein provided a sworn Declaration attesting to these matters. In addition, on October 13, 2018, Epstein sat for more than two hours and answered all questions relating to the alleged federal civil contempt for alleged discovery violations and Movants had an opportunity to cross exam Epstein about the Declaration. There is simply nothing within the scope of this Court's ruling that Epstein has not answered. At the April 13, 2018, hearing Edwards' counsel informed the Court that: 4 EFTA00793404  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 5 of 97 SCAROLA: ... and as far as Jeffrey Epstein is concerned, obviously he was personally prohibited by the express language of the Court's order from possessing or accessing any of this information, and he would certainly want to take Mr. Epstein's deposition. While representations have been made with regard to the extent that Mr. Epstein has been in possession of, or had access to this privileged information, the record is completely devoid of any sworn representation by Mr. Epstein, and clearly that is essential in terms of this Court fashioning, or first of all determining who is responsible for these very serious violations, and in fashioning an appropriate response. (Apr. Tr. 17:8-19.) Epstein has now provided not only his direct testimony but two hours of cross examination. In his Declaration, Epstein attested that he had no personal knowledge of how the disc came into Fowler White's possession (Ex. B, 1 5) and that he had never seen the disc (Ex. B, 1 6). Epstein confirmed this testimony during his deposition: Q. How is it that you can tell us under oath today that you had no prior knowledge of Fowler White having come into possession of a disc relating to your litigation? A. So, to be clear, to the best of my recollection today, the answer is no. I have no recollection whatsoever. (Ex. A, 25:4-10.) Also see Ex. A, 25:24-26:8. Q. Have you ever communication with any agent of Fowler White about the disc that was turned over by them to Link & Rockenbach? A. No. Not to the best of my knowledge. Q. Have you ever communicated with Tonja or Fred Haddad about the Fowler White disc? A. Not to the best of my knowledge. Q. Did you ever receive a copy of the disc itself? A. No. 5 EFTA00793405  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 6 of 97 (Ex. A, 56:4-13.) Edwards' counsel has admitted that it is not Edwards' contention that Epstein had the disc, but that after the disc was located by Link & Rockenbach, Epstein was provided alleged privileged information contained on the disc. While Edwards asked questions of Epstein about dissemination to others, what he read from the disc and things of that nature, those questions, among many others, exceeded the scope of inquiry allowed by this Court. This Court has already ruled that for purposes of the Show Cause proceedings it was not going to allow Movants to ask question regarding what material Epstein received after Link & Rockenbach discovered the disc. Consequently, any issues that remain unresolved after Epstein's deposition as to those questions is of no moment in these proceedings. The alleged privileged e-mails and all issues related to privilege and waiver are currently pending before the State Court. CONCLUSION As the sole basis for seeking to hold Epstein liable for a violation of the November 2010 Agreed Order, Movants contend that Epstein's receipt from Link & Rockenbach in 2018 of documents from the disc was somehow a violation of the nearly eight-year-old November 2010 Agreed Order. The Court has already flatly rejected that argument and determined that all issues relating to what happened after Link & Rockenbach found the disc in 2018 are matters exclusively for the State Court that will not be considered at the Show Cause proceedings. Rather, the Show Cause proceedings are limited, as to Epstein, regarding whether he was aware of Fowler White's possession of the disc and whether he possessed the disc or any alleged privileged documents at any time before Link & Rockenbach found it. Epstein's two hours of cross examination provides all the testimony necessary to determine if Epstein violated the November 2010 Agreed Order. There is nothing left to cross examine Epstein about within the parameters set by this Court. 6 EFTA00793406  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 7 of 97 Because cross examination would be duplicative of the testimony already given, Epstein's testimony at the Show Cause hearing would provide no further benefit to the Court. Accordingly, Epstein respectfully requests that he personally be excused from attending the show cause hearing. GOOD-FAITH CERTIFICATION Epstein's counsel certify that on October 18, 2018, they asked Movants' counsel if Movants would oppose the relief sought herein. Movants oppose the relief sought. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 19, 2018, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served electronically to all registered users on the CM/ECF system, which includes counsel identified on the service list below. RICE PUGATCH ROBINSON STORFER & COHEN, PLLC By: /s/ Chad P. Pugatch CHAD P. PUGATCH (FBN [email protected] - AND — I hereby certify that I am admitted to the Bar of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and I am in compliance with the additional qualifications to practice in this Court set forth in Local Rule 2090-1(A). 7 EFTA00793407  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 8 of 97 LINK c R KENBA H PA By: /s/ Scott J. Link SCOTT J. LINK (FBN 602991) [email protected] Counselfor Jeffrey Epstein SERVICE LIST Jack Scarola Bradley J. Edwards ar D nn ar la Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. Brittany N. Henderson Edwards Pottinger LLC Counselfor Bradley J. Edwards °tense or anner a e, ersstng, cards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell Peter E. Shapiro S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Shapiro Law Utah uite 3000 ounse or ., . . an ane Doe Counselfor L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe Niall T. McLachlan Isaac M. Marcushamer Carlton Fields Jorden Burt P.A. Ber er Sin erman LLP 200 °rinse or ow er nr e urnett, P.A. Counselfor liquidating Trustee 2077028 8 EFTA00793408 Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 9 of 97 EXHIBIT A EFTA00793409 Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 10 of 97 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMB JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually; BRADLEY EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs. / VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN Saturday, October 13th, 2018 9:07 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. 1555 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, #930 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Examination of the witness taken before Sonja D. Hall Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 1665 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 1001 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793410  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 11 of 97 L 1 APPEARANCES: 2 For Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant: 3 T,TNK 4 ROCKFNRArN P A 4 By SCOTT J. LINK, ESQUIRE 5 By KARA BERARD ROCKENBACH, ESQUIRE 6 For Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant: 7 ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 8 By JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE 9 10 For Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs: 11 SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA, BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A. 12 13 By JACK SCAROLA, ESQUIRE 14 For Fowler White: 15 CARLTON FIELDS, PA 16 By JOSEPH IANNO, JR, ESQUIRE 17 18 For L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe: 19 S.J. QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW 20 21 By PAUL G. CASSELL, ESQUIRE (Telephonically) 22 ALSO PRESENT 23 Above & Beyond Reprographics 24 By Manuel Santiago, Videographer 25 Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793411  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 12 of 97 1 INDEX 2 3 Videotaped Deposition of JEFFREY EPSTEIN Page No. 4 5 Direct Examination by Mr. Scarola 5 6 Certificate of Oath 83 7 Certificate of Reporter 84 8 Read & Sign Letter to Witness 85 9 10 11 12 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT INDEX 13 (No exhibits were marked.) 14 15 16 DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT INDEX 17 18 No. Description Page No. 19 1 Sworn Declaration of Jeffrey Epstein 6 20 2 Affidavit of Jeffrey Epstein 40 21 3 Re-Notice of Taking Deposition 58 22 4 Re-Notice of Taking Deposition 62 23 24 25 Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793412  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 13 of 97 4 1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are on the video 2 record. This is the 13th day of 3 October 2018. The time is approximately 4 9:07 a.m. 5 This is the videotaped deposition of 6 Jeffrey Epstein in the matter of Jeffrey 7 Epstein versus Scott Rothstein, 8 individually; Bradley Edwards, individually; 9 L.M. individually. 10 This deposition is being held at 1555 11 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, West Palm Beach, 12 Florida 33401. 13 My name is Manuel Santiago. I am the 14 videographer representing Above & Beyond 15 Reprographics. 16 Will the attorneys please announce 17 their appearances for the record? 18 MR. SCAROLA: My name is Jack Scarola. 19 I am counsel on behalf of Bradley Edwards. 20 MR. LINK: Scott Link and Kara 21 Rockenbach on behalf of Mr. Epstein. 22 MR. GOLDBERGER: And Jack Goldberger on 23 behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. 24 MR. SCAROLA: On the phone we have 25 Professor Paul Cassell. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793413  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 14 of 97 5 1 MR. CASSELL: Can I just chime in here? 2 Paul Cassell for L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe, 3 intervenors in the Florida State court 4 action. 5 THEREUPON, 6 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 7 being a witness in the notice heretofore 8 filed, and being first duly sworn in the above cause, 9 testified on his oath as follows: 10 THE WITNESS: Yes. 11 DIRECT EXAMINATION 12 BY MR. SCAROLA: 13 Q Would you please state your full name? 14 A Jeffrey E. Epstein. 15 Q Would you list for us, please, each of your 16 residence addresses? 17 MR. GOLDBERGER: I think it's beyond 18 the scope. I'm going to object to Fifth 19 Amendment. 20 You want him to invoke or you okay with 21 me doing it? 22 MR. SCAROLA: We want Mr. Epstein to 23 invoke any privilege that Mr. Epstein 24 considers appropriate to invoke. 25 THE WITNESS: The Fifth. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793414  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 15 of 97 1 BY MR. SCAROLA: 2 Q I'm sorry? 3 A The Fifth. 4 Q You are the same Jeffrey Epstein that is a 5 party in the current state court proceedings in which 6 Bradley Edwards has brought suit against you for 7 malicious prosecution, correct? 8 A Correct. 9 Q Mr. Epstein, I'm going to hand you what I 10 have marked as Exhibit Number 1 to this deposition. 11 Ask you to take a look at that document. 12 MR. SCAROLA: Paul, this is 13 Mr. Epstein's sworn declaration of fact that 14 was filed in the bankruptcy court 15 proceeding. 16 MR. CASSELL: I am familiar with that. 17 Thank you, Jack. 18 (Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs' Exhibit 19 Number 1 was marked for identification.) 20 BY MR. SCAROLA: 21 Q Do you recognize the document, Mr. Epstein? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Is that, in fact, your signature above the 24 line that says Jeffrey Epstein? 25 A Yes. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793415  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 16 of 97 Q There is a signature to the left of yours at 2 the bottom of the document. Whose signature is that? 3 A I don't know. 4 Q Who were the attorneys who were representing 5 you at the time that this declaration was prepared on 6 August 14, 2018? 7 MR. LINK: Object to the form. 8 THE WITNESS: Could you ask the 9 question again? 10 BY MR. SCAROLA: 11 Q Yes, sir. 12 Who were the lawyers who were representing 13 you in this matter on August 14, 2018? 14 THE WITNESS: Scott Link. 15 BY MR. SCAROLA: 16 Q Anyone else? 17 A Jack Goldberg. 18 Q Anyone else? 19 A Darren Indyke. 20 Q Anyone else? 21 A Not that I recall. 22 Q Who prepared this declaration? 23 A I believe the Link firm. 24 Q Was it sent to you initially in the form in 25 which it presently appears? Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793416  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 17 of 97 1 A I don't recall. 2 Q Do you have any recollection whatsoever of 3 having any input into the content of this declaration? 4 MR. LINK: So, Mr. Epstein, I just want 5 to caution you. I don't want you to share 6 any of our communications or conversations. 7 Okay. You can answer the question 8 without disclosing anything we have talked 9 about. 10 THE WITNESS: No. 11 BY MR. SCAROLA: 12 Q You had no input? 13 A I don't have anything separate from my 14 attorneys. Any input I have is with conversations with 15 my attorneys. 16 Q That's not my question. I have not asked you 17 whether you received any information from your 18 attorneys. 19 I asked you whether you had any input into 20 the content of this declaration. 21 MR. LINK: Again, I am going to 22 instruct you not to disclose any of our 23 conversations and communications. 24 You can simply answer yes or no to the 25 question. If you remember it, then you can. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793417  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 18 of 97 1 THE WITNESS: Sorry. So I'm clear, the 2 conversations I had with you about this -- 3 MR. LINK: We are not going to talk 4 about. 5 THE WITNESS: So is that an answer of 6 yes or no? 7 MR. LINK: If the question is, do you 8 recall whether you made any changes to what 9 was sent to you, I think you can answer yes 10 or no. 11 MR. SCAROLA: That's not the question. 12 BY MR. SCAROLA: 13 Q I want to know whether you had any input 14 whatsoever into the drafting of this declaration. 15 Was any of the information contained in 16 this declaration -- included in the declaration as a 17 consequence of input that you personally had? Or 18 was it simply all drafted by somebody else for your 19 signature? 20 MR. LINK: So, if you can answer that 21 question without disclosing our 22 communications, you can answer the question. 23 If you can't answer it without disclosing 24 our communication, Mr. Epstein, then you are 25 instructed not to answer it. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793418  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 19 of 97 10 1 BY MR. SCAROLA: 2 Q Your answer to the question, sir? 3 A I can't disclose anything -- I have only had 4 a conversation with my attorney regarding this. 5 Q Yes, sir. 6 But my question does not ask you about any 7 communication you had with your lawyers. I am 8 asking you whether you had any input into the 9 language that is included within this declaration. 10 Is anything here your -- the consequence 11 of your input? 12 MR. LINK: So, let me just -- I have 13 two questions for you, Mr. Scarola. One, I 14 thought we were starting with the state 15 court matter. 16 MR. SCAROLA: We are. 17 MR. LINK: I may have misunderstood, 18 because this is a bankruptcy declaration. 19 And there isn't anything in Judge Hafele's 20 order that talks about bankruptcy testimony 21 or spoke that you can inquire about. 22 Obviously, by signing this, he has 23 adopted every statement in there as his own. 24 So I'm not sure what we are doing at the 25 moment. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793419  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 20 of 97 11 1 BY MR. SCAROLA: 2 Q Can you answer the question, sir? 3 A I cannot answer the question. 4 Q Why? 5 A Anything I talked about with respect to this 6 document is a conversation with my attorneys. 7 Q And I'm not asking about any communication 8 you had with your lawyer. I want to know whether 9 anything in this affidavit is as a consequence of your 10 personal input. 11 MR. LINK: So, if there was anything 12 you did separate and apart from our 13 conversations, then you can tell him. If 14 not -- 15 THE WITNESS: No. 16 BY MR. SCAROLA: 17 Q No what? 18 A No. 19 Q Nothing in this affidavit was as a result of 20 your personal input; is that correct? 21 MR. LINK: What he said was separate 22 and apart. 23 My instruction is, you may not disclose 24 any of our communications. If you can 25 answer the question about something you did Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793420  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 21 of 97 12 1 separate and apart from my directions to you 2 or our communications, you can answer the 3 question. Other than that, you cannot. 4 MR. SCAROLA: Mr. Link, communications 5 with counsel are privileged if they are 6 intended to remain confidential. 7 If Mr. Epstein communicated something 8 to you to include within this affidavit, 9 that, obviously, was not intended to remain 10 confidential. It was intended to be 11 communicated in this particular filing. 12 MR. LINK: Mr. Scarola, I disagree with 13 you. I'm instructing him not to answer if 14 it's based on our communications period. 15 BY MR. SCAROLA: 16 Q The second paragraph of this affidavit says, 17 "The law firm of Fowler White Burnett, PA, represented 18 me" -- meaning you -- "in the state court proceeding 19 from June 2010 through May 2012." 20 What were the terms on which you retained 21 the Fowler White Burnett law firm? 22 MR. LINK: Mr. Scarola, you are 23 exceeding the scope of the deposition in the 24 state court matter. 25 There are four very specific limited Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793421  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 22 of 97 13 1 topics, none of which have you asked a 2 single question about. I'm really trying to 3 understand what -- 4 Do you want to do the bankruptcy first? 5 MR. SCAROLA: No. No, sir. I want to 6 do the state court proceeding first. I'm 7 asking questions that relate directly to the 8 topics that are defined within the state 9 court order and I would like an answer to 10 that question. 11 MR. LINK: Would you please tell me 12 which topic you are focused on? There are 13 only four. 14 MR. SCAROLA: This relates to all of 15 them. 16 MR. LINK: It does not, Mr. Scarola. 17 MR. SCAROLA: We have a disagreement 18 about that. If you are instructing him not 19 to answer, then the court will make a 20 determination as to whether that is or is 21 not an appropriate instruction and whether 22 we will or will not be back here to redepose 23 Mr. Epstein once again. 24 Are you instructing him to the answer? 25 MR. LINK: Your question is what were Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793422  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 23 of 97 1 1 the terms of his engagement of Fowler White? 2 MR. SCAROLA: Yes, that's correct. 3 MR. LINK: Then I'm instructing him not 4 to answer. 5 BY MR. SCAROLA: 6 Q Did you engage Fowler White on an hourly 7 basis? 8 MR. LINK: I am instructing him not to 9 answer. 10 BY MR. SCAROLA: 11 Q Did Fowler White present invoices to you for 12 services that were rendered on an hourly basis? 13 MR. LINK: I am instructing him not to 14 answer. 15 BY MR. SCAROLA: 16 Q Were you ever billed by Fowler White with 17 invoices that included a description of the services 18 that Fowler White rendered on your behalf? 19 MR. LINK: I am instructing him not to 20 answer. 21 BY MR. SCAROLA: 22 Q Were you kept informed as to what Fowler 23 White did on your behalf in connection with their 24 representation of you? 25 MR. LINK: I'm instructing him not to Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793423  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 24 of 97 15 1 answer. It exceeds the scope of the court's 2 order. 3 BY MR. SCAROLA: 4 Q Your affidavit -- excuse me. Your 5 declaration states that as part of Fowler White's 6 representation of you, that they represented you in 7 proceedings in the bankruptcy case concerning a 8 subpoena that your original counsel issued to the 9 bankruptcy trustee. Is that statement true? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Who was your original counsel that issued the 12 subpoena to the bankruptcy trustee? 13 A I don't recall. 14 Q What was subpoenaed? 15 A The question again. 16 Q What was subpoenaed? 17 A I don't recall. 18 Q Were emails subpoenaed? 19 A I'm not sure what subpoena you are talking 20 about. Sorry. 21 Q The one that you declared under penalty of 22 perjury was issued by your original counsel to the 23 bankruptcy trustee. 24 A I don't recall. 25 Q Did you ever come to learn that the trustee Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793424  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 25 of 97 16 1 in the bankruptcy for the law firm Rothstein, 2 Rosenfeldt & Adler had been subpoenaed to produce 3 emails contained on the server of that law firm? 4 A I don't recall. 5 Q Did it ever come to your attention that 6 emails contained on the server of the law firm 7 Rothstein, Rosenfeldt & Adler had been produced in 8 connection with the state court civil proceedings by 9 the bankruptcy trustee to a special master that had 10 been appointed for purposes of determining what, if 11 any, emails from that production would be turned over 12 in response to the subpoena that was issued? 13 A Separate from any conversations with my 14 attorney, I don't recall. 15 Q Did you ever learn that privilege was being 16 asserted with respect to the production of any emails 17 that were contained on a Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler 18 server? 19 A Separate from a conversation with my 20 attorneys, I don't recall. 21 Q Are you aware, as you sit here today, that 22 federal bankruptcy Judge Ray issued an order with 23 respect to procedures to be followed in connection with 24 responding to an email subpoena? 25 MR. LINK: Object to the form. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793425  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 26 of 97 17 1 MR. SCAROLA: What's the problem with 2 the form? 3 MR. LINK: You didn't give us any time. 4 Is there more than one? S MR. SCAROLA: No, I did. I said as you 6 sit here today. 7 MR. LINK: No, as to the order. But -- 8 If you can answer the question, you can 9 answer question. 10 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. You have to 11 repeat it. 12 BY MR. SCAROLA: 13 Q Yes. As you sit here today, are you aware 14 that federal bankruptcy Judge Ray issued an order 15 concerning matters relating to the production of 16 Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler emails? 17 MR. LINK: Object to the form. 18 THE WITNESS: Outside conversations 19 with my attorney, no. 20 BY MR. SCAROLA: 21 Q Have you ever seen an order issued by federal 22 bankruptcy Judge Ray that impose restrictions on the 23 possession of electronic data produced in response to a 24 subpoena for emails from the Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, 25 Adler law firm? Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793426  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 27 of 97 1 MR. LINK: Object to the form. 2 THE WITNESS: Outside of conversations 3 with my attorney, no. 4 BY MR. SCAROLA: 5 Q Tell me about the conversations that you had 6 with your lawyers relating to the terms of Judge Ray's 7 order. 8 MR. LINK: I am going to instruct you 9 not to answer that question. 10 BY MR. SCAROLA: 11 Q Have you ever personally seen any of the 12 language that was included within Judge Ray's order? 13 A Outside of the conversations with my 14 attorney, no. 15 Q Well, a conversation with your lawyer does 16 not tell me anything in response to a question that 17 asks what you have seen. 18 Have you ever seen any of the language 19 included within Judge Ray's order that impose 20 restrictions on the possession of electronic data 21 relating to emails of the Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, 22 Adler firm? 23 MR. LINK: So let me object to the 24 form. 25 If you can answer the question Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793427  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 28 of 97 19 1 independent of communications with your 2 lawyer -- so if you looked at the order on 3 your own, then you can answer. 4 THE WITNESS: I don't recall. 5 BY MR. SCAROLA: 6 Q Are you aware that contempt proceedings are 7 pending in the federal bankruptcy court? 8 A Yes. 9 Q What is your understanding of what those 10 proceedings are about? 11 A It's in regards to the discovery of a disc 12 that was in possession of Fowler White. 13 Q What is it in regard to that disc? 14 A That's not a very good question. Sorry. 15 Q I'm sorry? 16 A Can you ask a question? 17 Q The question is, what is it about this disc 18 that is the subject matter of contempt proceedings in 19 the bankruptcy court? 20 MR. LINK: So, again, if you can answer 21 the question based on your own personal 22 review of information rather than our 23 communications, you can share that with 24 Mr. Scarola. 25 THE WITNESS: Nothing outside my Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793428  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 29 of 97 20 1 conversations with the attorney. 2 BY MR. SCAROLA: 3 Q Did you ever become aware that a subpoena was 4 issued to the bankruptcy trustee to produce emails? 5 A I don't recall. 6 Q Did you ever become aware that a claim of 7 privilege was asserted with regard to any of the emails 8 on the Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler server? 9 A Outside of conversations with my attorney, 10 no. 11 Q Did your lawyer tell you that a claim of 12 privilege had been made with regard to any of the 13 emails on the RRA server? 14 MR. LINK: Mr. Scarola, you know better 15 than to ask that question. 16 Mr. Epstein, do not answer that 17 question. 18 MR. SCAROLA: Mr. Link, those happen to 19 be matters as to which privilege is waived 20 as a consequence of your own disclosures in 21 your own affidavits and your own statements 22 with respect to this case. 23 MR. LINK: I disagree with you. 24 MR. SCAROLA: That's fine. 25 MR. LINK: I'm going to instruct you Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793429  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 30 of 97 21 1 not to answer. 2 MR. SCAROLA: Just as long as you know 3 that it is our position that there has been 4 a waiver. You can instruct the witness not 5 to answer and the court will make a 6 determination with regard to that legal 7 issue. 8 MR. LINK: There's no question. 9 And I will say this, for the record. 10 You haven't asked a single question about 11 the four topics that Judge Hafele 12 specifically delineated for this limited 13 deposition you could take. 14 But I am instructing you not to answer 15 the question, Mr. Epstein. 16 BY MR. SCAROLA: 17 Q Paragraph four of your declaration, Exhibit 18 Number 1, states, "In February 2018, Scott J. Link of 19 Link & Rockenbach, PA, informed me that he had located 20 a disc in Fowler White's files labeled," quote, Epstein 21 Bate Stamp, unquote. 22 Did I read that accurately? 23 A Correct. 24 Q That was a communication from Mr. Link, your 25 lawyer, to you, correct? Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793430  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 31 of 97 22 1 A Yes. 2 Q What else did Mr. Link tell you? 3 MR. LINK: So, I'm going to instruct 4 you not to disclose any of your 5 conversations that involved legal advice or 6 strategy or protected communication. 7 If you recall that I said anything 8 other than I located a disc specific to that 9 topic, you can answer. 10 THE WITNESS: I remember that. 11 Everything else I talked with my attorneys. 12 BY MR. SCAROLA: 13 Q Yes, I know you were talking to your lawyer. 14 I want to know everything that your lawyer told you in 15 this conversation that you have partially disclosed. 16 MR. LINK: So -- 17 BY MR. SCAROLA: 18 Q What else did he tell you? 19 MR. LINK: So, I'm going to instruct 20 you not to answer based both on 21 attorney-client privilege and exceeds the 22 scope of Judge Hafele's order. 23 BY MR. SCAROLA: 24 Q Your response? 25 MR. LINK: I have instructed him not to Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793431  Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6482 Filed 10/19/18 Page 32 of 97 23 1 answer. 2 BY MR. SCAROLA: 3 Q When in February of 2018 did you have this 4 communication with Mr. Link? 5 A I don't recall specifically. 6 Q What was the form of the communication? 7 A I don't recall specifically. 8 Q When you tell me you don't recall 9 specifically, that suggest that you may recall 10 generally. What is your recollection with regard to 11 the form that the communication took? 12 A It's not specifically -- I believe it was a 13 phone call. But that's my best recollection. 14 Q Where were you when you received that phone 15 call? 16 A No idea. 17 Q Did Mr. Link tell you why he was calling to 18 tell you that he had located a disc? 19 MR. LINK: Mr. Epstein, I am going to 20 instruct you not to answer the question. 21 BY MR. SCAROLA: 22