Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM
Summary
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 90-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/05/2009 Pag Vit JANE DOE NO. 2, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. PLAINITFF'S ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST INTERROGATORIES Plaintiff, JANE DOE 2, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33, hereby resRonds toptefendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff as fo4oWs: General Objections 1. Plaintiff objects to Defendants Interrogatories to the extent that the Interrogatories call for the disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, or other applicable privilege or immunity, whether created by statute or common law. Plaintiff claims such privileges and protections to the extent implicated by each Interrogatory, and excludes privileged and protected information from any r
Persons Referenced (2)
Tags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 69 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2 Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his Answer to the Second Amended Complaint and states: 1. Without knowledge and deny. 2. As to the allegations in paragraphs 2, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 41h DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "[fit would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege ba
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2009 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion To Stay And Or Continue Action For Time Certain Based On Parallel Civil And Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby moves this Court for the entry of an order staying or continuing this action for a time certain (i.e., until late 2010 when the NPA expires), pursuant to the application of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the fact that a parallel proceeding is ongoing and being investigated. In support of his motion, EPSTEIN states: I. Introduction At the outset, EPSTEIN notes this Court's prior Order, (DE 33), in which this Court denied a motion for stay brought by Def
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. VICTIM'S MOTION TO UNSEAL NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT COMES NOW the Petitioners, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, by and through their undersigned attorneys, pursuant to the Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 ("CVRA"), and file this motion to unseal the non-prosecution agreement that has been provided to their attorneys under seal in this case. The agreement should be unsealed because no good cause exists for sealing it. Moreover, the Government has inaccurately described the agreement in its publicly-filed pleadings, creating a false impression that the agreement protects the victims. Finally, the agreement should be unsealed to facilitate consultation by victims' counsel with others involved who have
Condensed Transcript
• ,I • • L.M., Condensed Transcript IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Case No. 502008CA028051 XXXXMB AD DEPOSITION OF LARRY EUGENE MORRISON TAKEN ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF VOLUME I Pages 1 to 200 October 6, 2009 10:55 a.m. 515 N. Flagler Drive West Palm Beach, FL 33401-4321 court reporter 0 ESQUIRE Toll Free: Facsimile: I MMIIM www.esquIresolutionS.com EFTA00181380 • • • EFTA00181381 Larry Eugene Morrison - Volume I October 6, 2009 • • 1 IN /NS CIRCUIT COURT Of TAR 15Th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND PM PAIN BRACH COUNTY. FLORIDA VOLONE I Pages 1 to 200 2 3 3 APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL On behalf of the Defendant ATTEFOURY. GOLDBERGER A WEISS BY: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER. ESO.. 4 250 Australian Avenue Suite 1400 5 act. FL 33401 Plaintiff. I 6 /Case No. 5020006020051 On behalf of the Defendant by telephone: IX/WM AD JRFPRRY DITHER. e BURMAN. CR
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 148 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/09/2009 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2 Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED FIRST MOTION TO AMEND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves to amend his affirmative defenses as set forth in the attached Defendant EPSTEIN's First Amended Answer & Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Rule 15(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009); Loc. Gen. Rules 7.1, 15.1 (S.D. Fla. 2009): 1. Pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., a party may amend his pleading "only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires." Plaintiff's counsel has consented in writing to D
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 66-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/26/2009 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, 1. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. 11+ 1 DOCKET NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION VIA VIDEO PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned attorney will take the deposition via video of: DEPONENT DATE & TIME LOCATION OF DEPOSITION Jane Doe #3 Tuesday, U.S. Legal Support do Stuart Mermelstein, Esq. April 14, 2008 444 West Railroad Avenue 18205 Biscayne Boulevard 9:00 a.m. Suite 300 Suite 2218 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Miami, FL 33160 Phone: 561 835-0220 upon oral examination, before U.S. Legal Support, a Notary Public, or any other officer authorized by law to take depositions in the State of Florida. The oral examination is being taken for the purpose of discovery, for use at trial, or for s ch other purposes as are permitted under the applicable Statutes of Rules of
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.