EFTA01107612.pdf

JEFFREY EPSTEIN, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN Plaintiff, AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA VS. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually. JUDGE: CROW Defendants. PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF THIS COURT'S ORDER DATED MARCH 11.2013 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), by and through his undersigned counsel and pursuant to Rules 1.530, 1.280, and 1.350 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby seeks clarification of this Court's Order on Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards's ("Edwards") Motion to Strike Untimely Objections to Financial Discovery, which was entered by this Court on March 11, 2013 (hereinafter "the Order"). In support thereof, Epstein states: SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS On February 22, 2013, Epstein filed his responses to Edwards's Net Worth Interrogatories and Request for Production. On February 25, 2013, in response, Edwards filed a Motion to Strike Untimely Objections to Financial Discovery. During oral argument on this Motion on March 11, 2013, the Court permitted Edwards's very able counsel to fully argue all of the issues purportedly raised in his one-line Motion to Strike Untimely Objections to Financial Discovery ("Motion"). This Court further permitted Epstein's counsel to rebut Edwards's position, and Edwards's counsel to respond to Epstein's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Edwards's Motion. On 1 EFTA01107612 March 11, 2013, this Court entered its Order on Edwards's Motion by overruling all objections other than privilege; to wit: [t]he court heard argument of counsel, reviewed the court file, has reviewed the authorities counsel has cited, has reviewed the discovery along with the objections filed on behalf of the Counter-Defendant . . . [t]he Counter-Defendant's Objections to Discovery other than privilege (including but not limited to constitutional guarantees under the V, VI and XIV Amendments, attorney/client privilege, work product privilege) are overruled. March 11, 2013 Order on Counter-Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Untimely Objections to Financial Discovery, attached hereto as "Exhibit A" (emphasis added). On March 20, 2013, Edwards served a Notice of a Specially-Set Hearing for thirty (30) minutes, scheduled for April 22, 2013 at 9:30AM, before this Court. The purported purpose of this special set hearing is to argue "Epstein's Privilege Objections raised in response to Interrogatories and Request for Production served 2/22/13." See Notice of Hearing, attached hereto as "Exhibit B." Edwards did not, however, file and/or serve a new Motion upon which he intends to argue this already ruled-upon issue before the Court. Instead, Edwards asserted that the "objections are already on file." See Email dated March 14, 2013 sent 2:31pm, attached hereto as "Exhibit C." A review of this Court's Order of March 11, 2013 regarding the Discovery Objections irrefutably shows that the issues raised in Edwards's Motion regarding the timeliness of Epstein's objections as well as all privilege issue(s) raised, were completely argued, considered, and decided by this Court. See Exhibit B. As such, based upon Edwards's pending Special Set Hearing, in which Edwards apparently seeks to re-litigate the privilege issues, Epstein requests that this Honorable Court clarify its 2 EFTA01107613  ruling with respect to the privilege issues adjudicated in the March 11, 2013 Order, or alternatively remove the Hearing from its docket. ARGUMENT A motion for clarification is the equivalent of a motion for rehearing. Kirby v. Speight, 217 So. 2d 871, 872 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969); Dambro v. Dambro, 900 So. 2d 724, 725-26 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). As such, a motion for clarification is filed in accordance with Rule 1.530(6) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. "The purpose of a Motion for a Rehearing is to give the trial court an opportunity to consider matters which it failed to consider or overlooked." Pingree v. Quaintance, 394 So. 2d 161, 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Here, Epstein is not requesting a rehearing on this issue, but only that this Court issue another Opinion, in which it more clearly delineates its ruling upon Edwards's Motion with respect to the privilege issue, based solely upon the fact that Edwards is impermissibly seeking to re-litigate the issue without a proper Motion or Notice. Edwards's demand for a hearing on April 22, 2013 on issues already decided in the record fits the legal definition of a Motion for Rehearing. Id. Edwards's request for this hearing, much like his previously-filed and ruled-upon Motion to Strike Discovery Objections as Untimely, is habitually devoid of proper motion practice, case law, and legal authority, leaving Epstein to speculate as to the issues he intends to raise with the court. In this instance, however, Edwards has not even filed a motion for his thirty (30) minute specially-set hearing, but instead relies solely on an email stating that the "objections are already on file." See Exhibit C Epstein is unable to respond to this and should not be required to. Moreover, because the only motion filed by Edwards 3 EFTA01107614  objecting to Epstein's responses to Edwards's financial net worth discovery, including the privileges raised, has already been fully adjudicated by this Court, Edwards is improperly asking for a rehearing. If, in fact, Edwards is seeking a rehearing on his already ruled-upon Motion, he should properly request and plead same. Finally, Epstein certifies that he, "in good faith, has conferred or attempted to confer" with Edwards regarding this purported discovery motion/motion for rehearing "without court action." FLA. R.CIV. P. 1.380. See Exhibit C; see also Communication to Counsels ofRecord dated March 20, 2013. Pursuant to Rule 1.380 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Epstein is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees incurred as necessitated by Edwards's actions. CONCLUSION Accordingly, for all of the reasons delineated above and in reliance upon the applicable law cited herein, Jeffrey Epstein respectfully requests that this Court, clarify its Court Order dated March 11, 2013, award attorney's fees as sanctions against Edwards, and such other and further relief as this Court deems proper. WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served upon all parties listed below, via Electronic Service, this March 21, 2013. Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. Fla. Bar No.: 0176737 LAW OFFICES OF TONJA HADDAD. PA 315 SE 7'h Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale Florida di3301 4 EFTA01107615  Electronic Service List Jack Scarola, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola et al. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger, & Weiss, PA 250 Australian Ave. South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Marc Nurik, Esq. 1 East Broward Blvd. Suite 700 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman 425 N Andrews Avenue Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale Florida 33301 Fred Haddad, Esq. 1 Financial Plaza Suite 2612 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 EFTA01107616  IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF IN AND FOR PALM BEACH FLORIDA COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, etc., et al., Defendants. ORDER ON COUNTER-PLAINTIFF'S MOT ION TO STRIKE UNTIMELY OBJECTIONS TO FINANCIAL DISCOVERY THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Counter-Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Untimely Objections to Financial Disco very. The Court heard argument of counsel, reviewed the court file, has reviewed the authorities counsel has cited, has reviewed the discovery along with the objections filed on behalf of the Counter-Defendant. Based upon the foregoing, and after a thorough review of same, it is CONSIDERED, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follow s: The Counter-Defendant's Objections to Discovery other than privilege (including but not limited to constitutional guarantees unde r the V, VI and XIV Amendments, attorney/client privilege, work product privilege, privacy privilege under the Florida Constitution or any other applicable privilege) are overr uled. However, as to any privileges other than a privilege against self-incrimination as guara nteed by the V, VI and XIV Amendments of the United States Constitution, the Counter-D efendant shall file a detailed privilege log outlining the documents and the applicable privile ge. The Counter-Defendant shall not be required to list any documents he conte nds arc EXHIBIT A EFTA01107617 Epstein u. Rothstein, et al. Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMRAG Order Page 2 privileged pursuant to the V, VI and XIV Amendments. The privilege log as well as more complete responses shall be filed within fifteen (15) days of the date of this Order. DONE AND ORDERED this 0 2 Bay of Marc. 013 at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. DAVID CIRCUIT COURT J Copy furnished: See attached list. EFTA01107618  IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff(s), vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendant(s). NOTICE OF SPECIAL SET HEARING 30 MINUTES YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the undersigned has called up for hearing the fol lowing: DATE: April 22, 2013 TIME: 9:30 a.m. JUDGE: Honorable David F. Crow (Palm Beach County Courthouse ) PLACE: 205 N. Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 ROOM #: 9-C SPECIFIC MATTERS TO BE HEARD: Epstein's Privilege Objections raised in response to Interrogato ries and Request for Production served 2/22/13 Moving counsel certifies that he or she contacted oppos ing counsel and attempted to resolve the discovery dispute without hearing. EXHIBIT B EFTA01107619 Edwards adv. Epstein Case No.: 502009CA040800YJOOMBAG Notice of Special Sct Hearing Division AG rules: 1. The JA cannot cancel this hearing unless the issue is resolv ed; 2. No add-ons are permitted; 3. Any Memorandums submitted are limited to 10 double-spa ced pages; 4. Any materials submitted are due at least 7 days prior to the hearing; and 5. The moving party is required to bring to the hearing a blank proposed Order with copies and envelopes. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foreg oing has been furnished by E-Service to all Counsel on the attached list, this VUday of March, 2013. LA No.: 169440 enney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley 9 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm 3409 Phone: Fax: Attorney for Bradley J. Edwards 2 EFTA01107620  Thursday, March 21, 2013 9:27:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time Subject: FW: Regarding: Edwards, Bradley adv. Epstein (File it 291874) Date: Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:38:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Debbie Fein To: Tonja Haddad Coleman Debbie Fein, Law Clerk Tonja Haddad, P.A. Advocate Building 315 S.E. 7th Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 954-312-0420 From: "Mary E. Pirrotta" < Date: Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:31 PM To: Debbie Fein < Subject: RE: Regarding: Edwards, Bradley adv. Epstein (File #: 29187 4) No. The Objections are already on file. From: Debbie Fein Sent: March 14, 2013 2:29 PM To: Mary E. Pirrotta Cc: Tonja Haddad Coleman Subject: Re: Regarding: Edwards, Bradley adv. Epstein (File #: 291874) Ms. Coleman is unavailable on this date. Please provid e alternate dates. Will there be a Motion filed before hearing? this Debbie Fein, Law Clerk Tonja Haddad, P.A. Advocate Building 315 S.E. 7th Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 EXHIBIT C EFTA01107621 From: "Mary E. Pirrotta" Date: Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:17 PM To: Tonja Haddad Coleman c , Debbie Fein c Subject: Regarding: Edwards, Bradley adv. Epstein (File #: 291874) Please advise if you are available for a 30 min. hearing on April 15, 2013 at 10:00 before Judge Crow Re: Privilege objections raised in response to Int. and RTP served 2/22/13 Privileged and Confidential Electronic communication is not a secure mode of communica tion and may be accessed by unauthorized persons. This communication originates from the law firm of Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. and is protected under the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 52510.2521 . The information contained in this E-mail message is privileged and confidential under Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420 and information intended only for the use of the individual(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copy of this communica tion is strictly prohibited. Personal messages express views solely of the sender and shall not be attributed to the law firm. If you received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or by telephone at (800) 780-8607 and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Privileged and Confidential Electronic communication is not a secure mode of communication and may be accessed by unauthorized persons. This communication originates from the law firm of Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. and is protected under the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 52510.2521 . The information contained in this E-mail message is privileged and confidential under Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420 and information intended only for the use of the individual(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copy of this communica tion is strictly prohibited. Personal messages express views solely of the sender and shall not be attributed to the law firm. If you received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or by telephone at (800) 780-8607 and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Page 2 of 2 EFTA01107622  Tonja Haddad Coleman From: Tonja Haddad Coleman Sent: Wednesday, March To: ; '[email protected]'; ; Debbie Fein Subject: WARDS ADV. EPSTEIN SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENTS - 502009CA040800)000(MBAG (File #: 291874) Attachments: Crow's Order.PDF The Judge has already ruled on all of our privilege objections as you requested at the last hearing- see Judge Crow's Order dated March 11, 2013, attached hereto for your reference. In sum, he overruled all objections except the privilege objections, rendering the need for this hearing moot. According ly, please cancel this hearing. Alternatively, if you are requesting a Motion for Rehearing or Reconsideration of the Judge's very specific Order, please provide a proper Motion. Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. TOW HADDAD, P.A. Advocate Building 315 SE 7th Street Fo The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. II you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient. Please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Mary E. Pirrotta [mail6 Sen : Wednesda Mar h 20 2013 11:52 AM T r. '; '[email protected]'; Tonja Haddad Coleman; Debbie Fein Subject: EDWARDS ADV. EPSTEIN SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENTS - 502009CA040800)000(MBAG (File #: 291874) IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually Notice of Special Set • 13 Sent by: Jack Scarola *************•********** ********** ****** ****** *** ********* *** ***** **** *********** ** ******* Privileged and Confidential Electronic communication is not a secure mode of communication and may be accessed by unauthorized persons. This communication originates from the law firm of Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. and is protected under the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. S2510- 2521. The information contained in this E-mail message is privileged and confidential under Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420 and information intended only for the use of the individual(s) named above. If the reader of this EFTA01107623 message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. Personal messages express views solely of the sender and shall not be attributed to the law firm. If you received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or by telephone at (800) 780-8607 and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. ********************* **************************************************** *************** ** 2 EFTA01107624