Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00222073DOJ Data Set 9Other

* Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00222073
Pages
2
Persons
4
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

* Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 57-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, I. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, dated December 19, 2008 Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to the Request to Produce, dated December 19, 2008 and states: Request No. 1. All policies of insurance, including the declarations page and all binders, amendments, and endorsements, covering Defendant's residence at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, FL 33480. Response: Objection, overly broad, not relevant and material and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff alleged claims occurred during a specific time period in 2004 - 2005, yet to be specifically identified. Yet, no time period wh

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 57-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, I. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, dated December 19, 2008 Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, serves his responses and objections to the Request to Produce, dated December 19, 2008 and states: Request No. 1. All policies of insurance, including the declarations page and all binders, amendments, and endorsements, covering Defendant's residence at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, FL 33480. Response: Objection, overly broad, not relevant and material and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff alleged claims occurred during a specific time period in 2004 - 2005, yet to be specifically identified. Yet, no time period whatsoever is set forth in the Request for Production. Additionally, Defendant objects in that the policies contain value and/or asset information which is not relevant, material nor calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence at this point in time; said information is both private and confidential. EXHIBIT "C" EFTA00222073 Case 9:08-cv-80119-1M Document 57-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 2 of 2 Jane Doe No. 2 . Epstein Page 2 Certificate of Service WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this 26th day of January, 2009. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Miami FL 33160 Fax: ounse or laintiff Jane Doe #2 Jack Alan Goldberger , P.A. West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 Fax: uo-uounsei tor tietendant Jeffrey Epstein Respectfully sub By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Ba' No. 224162 , ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 BURMAN, CRI I TON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN es ch, 33401 Fax: (Co-counsel for e endant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00222074

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

56p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 35 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/0612008 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JOINT MOTION TO APPROVE STIPULATION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF PROCESS AND AGREED DATE FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSES TO COMPLAINTS EFTA00222397 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 35 Entered on FLSD Docket 08(0612008 Page 2 of 2 Plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4 and Jane Doe 5, and Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, file this Joint Motion for Approval of Stipulation of Acceptance of Service of Process and Agreed Date for Defendant's Respo

6p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

7p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

4p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

2p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2008 Page 1 of 3 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 REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS & FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN, (EPSTEIN), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his reply to Plaintiffs' Memorandum Of Law In Opposition To Motions To Dismiss, dated October 31, 2008, and states: Although Plaintiffs, Jane Doe Nos. 2 through 7, are separate and distinct persons, in separate and distinct actions, with separate and distinct facts and circumstances pertaining to the claims each is attempting to allege, Plaintiffs' counsel has filed a broad brush, identical response to Defendant's motions to dismiss and for more definite statement which were filed in each of the actions. As pointed out in Defendant's previo

3p

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.