EFTA01179433.pdf

v IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION -AG CASE NO. 502009CA0408003OOOCMB JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs. ORDER GRANTING COUNTER-DEFENDANT, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE came before the court on Counter-Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEINS, Motion for Summary Judgment regarding the Fourth Amended Counterclaim filed herein by Counter-Plaintiff and the court having reviewed the file and applicable precedent, having heard argument of counsel and being otherwise advised in the premises, it is hereupon ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: I. Mr. EPSTEIN filed suit against Mr. EDWARDS and Mt. EDWARDS thereafter filed a Counterclaim against Mr. EPSTEIN. After many months of litigation and on the eve of a heating on Mr. Edwards' Motion for Summary Judgment, Mr. EPSTEIN dismissed his Complaint without prejudice. The Counterclaim proceeded and went through several amendments. The Fourth Amended Counterclaim at issue here contains two causes of action. Those causes of action are abuse of process and malicious prosecution. EFTA01179433  2. The issue before the court is whether the absolute litigation privilege applies to causes of action for both abuse of process and malicious prosecution. 3. The court has reviewed Levin, Middlebroolcs, Moves & Mitchell, v. U.S. Fire Ins, QL, 639 So2d 606, 608 (Fla. 1994), geboffiriat & Frappier v. Cole, 950 Sold 380 (Fla. 2007) and Wolfe v. Foreman 38 Fla. L. Weekly D1540 (July 17, 2013). The court finds these cases to be binding. The court is bound by the holding of Levin, that all actions occurring during the course of a judicial proceeding, so long as the act has some relation to the proceeding, are absolutely privileged. This proposition was reaffirmed in Echevarria. While neither Levin nor Echevarria addressed claims for malicious prosecution, the Third District Court of Appeal in Wolfe, quoting in large part from Echevarria, found specifically that the litigation privilege applies to malicious prosecution claims and acts occurring during the course of a judicial proceeding, if those acts bear some relation to the proceeding. EFTA01179434  4. During the hearing on this matter, it was conceded by counsel for Counter-Plaintiff that all of the allegations made in both the abuse of process claim are of acts occurring during the course of what purported to be a judicial proceeding and bear some relation to the proceeding. It was further conceded that the malicious prosecution claim was based on the filing and continued prosecution of the same judicial proceeding. Counter-Plaintiff contended, however, that the litigation privilege could not afford protection to a party who intentionally and maliciously initiated a baseless and sham proceeding as part of an effort at extortion. 5. The court finds that the record evidence taken in the light most favorable to Mr. Edwards (as is required on this motion for summary judgment) strongly supports Mr. Edwards' factual contentions about the nature of the claims initiated and prosecuted against him by Mr. Epstein, however, this Court is bound by the holding in Wolfe that the litigation privilege is absolute and applies to both the abuse of process claim and malicious prosecution claims made herein. 6. The Counter-Plaintiff raged the court that Olson v. Johnson., 961 So.2d 356 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), is in conflict with Wolfe and that this conflict would allow this court to "peruse" other issues. However, the court finds Olson inapplicable because that case dealt with extra judicial false statements that were made to a police officer. The statements were not made during the course of a EFTA01179435 judicial proceeding and were therefore not privileged. For the reasons stated above, the Motion for Summary Judgment is granted. DONE AND ORDERED at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this day of , 2014. DONALD HAFEL,E CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE EFTA01179436 Edwards adv. Epstein Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG COUNSEL LIST William Chester Brewer uire Phone: (954)-745-5849 Fax: (954)-745-3556 250 S Australian Avenue, Suite 1400 Attorneys for Scott Rothstein West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561)-6554777 Fax: (561)-835-8691 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Jack A. Goldberger. Esquire Tonja Haddad, 315 SE 7th Street, Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Atterbury, Goldberger & Phone: (954)-467-1223 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 Fax: (954)-337-3716 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Phone: (561)-659-8300 Fax: (561)-835-8691 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein SJ. Bmd Edwards wards Es a i Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: (954)-524-2820 Fax: (954)-524-2822 Fred Haddad, Esquire Fred Haddad, One Financial Plaza, Suite 2612 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 Phone: (954)-467-6767 Fax: (954)467-3599 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Marc S. NurikEs uire Law Offices of Marc S. Nurik One E Broward Blvd., Suite 700 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 EFTA01179437