Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00221989DOJ Data Set 9Other

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00221989
Pages
6
Persons
3
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/3012008 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 5, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO. 08-80232-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO. 08-80380-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO. 08-80381-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON ORDER SETTING TRIAL DATE & DISCOVERY DEADLINES, REFERRING CASE TO MEDIATION & REFERRING DISCOVERY MOTIONS TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE EFTA00221989 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2008 Page 2 of 6 THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon receipt of the parties' joint scheduling report. It is thereupon, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: Trial Date & Location 1. This case is set for trial on the two-week cal

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/3012008 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 5, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO. 08-80232-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO. 08-80380-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO. 08-80381-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON ORDER SETTING TRIAL DATE & DISCOVERY DEADLINES, REFERRING CASE TO MEDIATION & REFERRING DISCOVERY MOTIONS TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE EFTA00221989 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2008 Page 2 of 6 THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon receipt of the parties' joint scheduling report. It is thereupon, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: Trial Date & Location 1. This case is set for trial on the two-week calendar commencing Monday, January 25, 2010. Counsel for all parties shall appear at a calendar call commencing at 10:00 o'clock A.M. on Friday, January 22, 2010. Unless instructed otherwise by subsequent order, the trial and all other proceedings in this case shall be conducted at the U.S. Courthouse, 701 Clematis Street, Courtroom 4, Third Floor, West Palm Beach, Florida. Motion Practice 2. Every motion filed in this case will be accompanied by one proposed original order granting the motion. The order will contain an up-to-date service list of all attorneys in the case, including e-mail addresses. Pretrial Schedule 3. Pretrial discovery will be conducted in accordance with Local Rules 16.1 and 26.1 and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No pretrial conference shall be held in this action, unless the Court determines, either sua sponie or upon motion and order, that a pretrial conference is necessary. In setting the following deadlines, the Court has considered the parties' suggested discovery schedule. Dates and other agreements between the parties not otherwise addressed herein shall be considered part of this Order. To the extent this Order conflicts with the Local Rules, this Order supercedes the Local Rules. Amend Pleadings/Add Parties -December 1, 2008 Discovery Cutoff —August 3, 2009 Substantive Pretrial Motions —August 3I, 2009 2 EFTA00221990 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2008 Page 3 of 6 Mediation Cutoff Mandatory Pretrial Stipulation Motions in Limine Responses to Motions in Limine Jury Instructions Proposed Findings & Conclusions Voir Dire Questions Exhibit List for Court Witness List for Court — 60 days before calendar call -Fifteen days before calendar call — Fifteen days before calendar call — Ten days before calendar call — Five days before calendar call — Five days before calendar call — Calendar call — First day of Trial (impeachment excepted) — First day of Trial (impeachment excepted) Mandatory Pretrial Stipulation 4. Counsel must meet at least one month prior to the beginning of the trial period to confer on the preparation of a Pretrial Stipulation in accordance with Local Rule 16.1E. A Pretrial Stipulation lacking substance will not be accepted. Any party causing a unilateral pretrial stipulation to be filed will be required to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed. Each attorney and each self-represented party is charged with the duty of complying with this Order. A motion for continuance shall not stay the requirement for the filing of the Pretrial Stipulation and, unless an emergency situation arises, or good cause is shown, a motion for continuance will not be considered unless it is filed at least twenty (20) days prior to the calendar call. Failure to comply with the time schedule may result in dismissal or other sanctions. Consent Jurisdiction 5. In light of the benefits offered by a trial before a magistrate judge, sa„, trial on a date certain as opposed to placement on a trial calendar, the parties are urged to consider this option. 3 EFTA00221991 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2008 Page 4 of 6 Therefore, within twenty (20) days of the entry of this order each attorney is ordered to meet with his or her client and discuss this option. Plaintiff's counsel shall monitor this process. If there is not unanimity in favor of magistrate jurisdiction, plaintiff's counsel need do nothing further. If, however, there is unanimity in favor of magistrate jurisdiction, plaintiff's counsel shall execute the form (which can be retrieved from www.flsd.uscourts.gov) entitled "Notice of Right to Consent to Disposition of a Civil Case by a United States Magistrate Judge," and forward the original, executed form to defendants' counsel. After completion by all defendants or their counsel, the original form should be forwarded to the Clerk of the Court, West Palm Beach Division. Mediation 6. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 and Local Rule 16.2, this case is referred to mediation, to the extent not excluded by Local Rule 16.2.C, as follows: a. The mediation shall be completed sixty (60) days prior to the scheduled calendar call; b. The parties shall, within sixty (60) days hereof, agree upon a mediator and advise the Clerk's office of their choice, failing which the Clerk will designate a mediator from the list of certified mediators on a blind random basis; c. Plaintiffs counsel shall be responsible for coordinating the mediation conference date and location agreeable to the mediator and all counsel of record; d. Within five (5) days following the mediation conference, the mediator shall file a Mediation Report indicating who attended the mediation and the result thereof. Discovery Referred to Magistrate Judge 7. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Magistrate Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the above-captioned cause is referred to United States Magistrate 4 EFTA00221992 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2008 Page 5 of 6 Judge for appropriate disposition of all pretrial discovery motions, and all motions that relate directly to these motions, such as motions for extension of time, motions for reconsideration, motions for sanctions, and motions for mental or physical examinations. This Order does not refer any motion which requests a continuance or extension of the trial or pretrial scheduling dates. Exhibits 8. Exhibits must be pre-marked and exchanged prior to execution of the Pretrial Stipulation. Each exhibit should be marked with a sticker identifying the case number, exhibit number, and party offering the exhibit. Jury Instructions and Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 9. In cases tried before a jury, each party shall submit joint, stipulated proposed jury instructions and a joint, stipulated proposed verdict form in hard copy form and on 3.5" diskette. All requested instructions shall be typed on a separate page, and except for Eleventh Circuit Pattern instructions, must be supported by citations of authority. Any objections to the proposed instructions shall be stated clearly and concisely and also shall be supported by citations of authority. In cases tried before the Court, each party shall file proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law in hard copy form and on 3.5" diskette. Proposed Conclusions of Law must be supported by citations of authority. Settlement 10. If a case is settled, counsel are directed to inform the Court promptly at (561) 561-514- 3790 and to submit an appropriate Stipulation for Order of Dismissal, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1). Such an Order must be filed within ten (10) days of notification to the Court, or prior to 5 EFTA00221993 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2008 Page 6 of 6 the Calendar Call, whichever occurs first. Cases are not removed from the trial calendar unless a stipulation for dismissal is filed with the Court. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Florida, this 29th day of September, 2008. United States District Judge Copies furnished to: Magistrate Judge All counsel of record 6 EFTA00221994

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 206 Entered on FLSD Docket 0716/2009 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, VS. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, EFTA00214072 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 206 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2009 Page 2 of 4 Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 6, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plai

4p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 107 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2009 Page 1 of 10 5/29/2009 4:41:55 PM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- MARRVJOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- MARRVJOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- MARRVJOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. EFTA00201180 Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 107 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2009 Page 2 of 10 5/29/2009 4:41:55 PM JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, VS. EFTA00201181 Case 9:08-cv-80811-K

10p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 324 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2015 Page 1 of 10

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 324 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2015 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:08-CV-80736-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ORDER DENYING PETITIONERS' MOTION TO JOIN UNDER RULE 21 AND MOTION TO AMEND UNDER RULE 15 This cause is before the Court on Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4's Corrected Motion Pursuant to Rule 21 for Joinder in Action ("Rule 21 Motion") (DE 280), and Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2's Protective Motion Pursuant to Rule 15 to Amend Their Pleadings to Conform to Existing Evidence and to Add Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 as Petitioners ("Rule 15 Motion") (DE 311). Both motions are ripe for review. For the following reasons, the Court concludes that they should be denied. I. Background This is an action by two unnamed petitioners, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, seeking to prosecute a claim under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 377

10p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING CO-CONSPIRATOR IMMUNITY PROVISION AND RELATED SUBJECTS COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to produce within 30 days the original or best copy of the items listed herein below for inspection and/or copying, pursuant to the Court's Order (DE 99) directing discovery in this case, the Court's Order denying the Government's motion to dismiss and lifting stay of discovery (DE 189), the Court's Omnibus Order (DE 190), and the Court's Order Denying Motion to Join (DE 324): BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have repeatedly asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in thi

8p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Ca_4ate.24h24/43134.01FrietibtOrtlefifitin0a0le28013,8111$2eafiabef146f 22

Ca_4ate.24h24/43134.01FrietibtOrtlefifitin0a0le28013,8111$2eafiabef146f 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. X 15-cv-07433-LAP Ms. Maxwell's Reply In Support Of Iler Objections to tnsealinu Sealed Materials Laura A. Menninger Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Ty Gee HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue EFTA00074964 Ca_QatIgt24743tictoWneDbtOrfiefiVIMOXIle?BOWERKVaffizte12401 22 Introduction This Court asked the parties to brief three issues: "(a) the weight of presumption of public access that should be afforded to an item, (b) the identification and weight of any countervailing interests supporting continued sealing/redaction of the item, and (c) whether the countervailing interests rebut the presumption of public access to the item." DE 1044 at 1. Plaintiff and the Miami Herald's responses improperly afford the highest level of presumption to discovery dispute documents, deny that any co

40p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 196 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/10/2009 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant JANE DOE NO. 3, Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON EFTA00221909 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 196 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/10/2009 Page 2 of 20 JANE DOE NO. 5, Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant JANE DOE NO. 6. Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/JOHNSON 2 EFTA00221910 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 196 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/10/2009 Page 3 of 20 CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MAR

20p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.