Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00234469DOJ Data Set 9Other

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00234469
Pages
4
Persons
6
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2008 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-80804-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, VS. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE [DE 121 Defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby responds to the plaintiff Jane Doe's motion to preserve evidence, as follows: I. The Certificate of Compliance annexed to the plaintiffs motion states that plaintiff's "counsel conferred with counsel for [Mr. Epstein] . . . and [Epstein's] counsel advised that [Epstein] opposelS] this motion." DE 12 at 2 (emphasis added). That certification is inaccurate. 2. On August 21, 2008, counsel for the plaintiff called Kathryn Meyers, Esq. of the Lewis Tein law firm to elicit Epstein's position on this motion. Ms. Meyers responded that she would confer with Mr. Tein and call them back. Less than thirty minutes later, however, plain

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-80804-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2008 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-80804-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, VS. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE [DE 121 Defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby responds to the plaintiff Jane Doe's motion to preserve evidence, as follows: I. The Certificate of Compliance annexed to the plaintiffs motion states that plaintiff's "counsel conferred with counsel for [Mr. Epstein] . . . and [Epstein's] counsel advised that [Epstein] opposelS] this motion." DE 12 at 2 (emphasis added). That certification is inaccurate. 2. On August 21, 2008, counsel for the plaintiff called Kathryn Meyers, Esq. of the Lewis Tein law firm to elicit Epstein's position on this motion. Ms. Meyers responded that she would confer with Mr. Tein and call them back. Less than thirty minutes later, however, plaintiff's counsel - - without waiting to hear back from us - - electronically filed the motion, incorrectly certifying that we had actually opposed it. 3. Upon receipt of the motion via CM/ECF, Ms. Meyers immediately notified plaintiffs counsel of their error. Plaintiffs counsel did not notify the court of the incorrect EFTA00234469 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2008 Page 2 of 4 certification, leaving the Court with the impression that Epstein opposed the motion and perhaps prompting the Court to order an expedited response. 4. In fact, Epstein has no opposition to the relief requested. 5. It is worth noting that the motion for return of property filed in the State criminal matter has not been noticed for a hearing, has not been argued or ruled upon, and no property has been returned. Respectfully submitted, LEWIS TEIN, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 Tel: 305 442 1101 Fax: 305 442 6744 By: /s/ Michael R. Tein GUY A. LEWIS Fla. Bar No. 623740 [email protected] MICHAEL R. TEIN Fla. Bar No. 993522 [email protected] KATHRYN A. MEYERS Fla. Bar No. 0711152 [email protected] ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. 561 659 8300 Fax. 561 835 8691 By: Jack A. Goldberger Fla. Bar No. 262013 [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein 2 EFTA00234470 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2008 Page 3 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 22, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive Notices of Electronic Filing. Is/ Michael R. Tein Michael R. Tein 3 EFTA00234471 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2008 Page 4 of 4 Service List Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer Kuvin, Esq. Ricci-Leopold, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Fax: 561 697 2383 Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Douglas M. McIntosh, Esq. (by fax and U.S. Mail) Jason A. McGrath, Esq. McIntosh, Sawran, Peltz & Cartaya, P.A. Centurion Tower 1601 Forum Place, Suite 1110 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Fax. 561 682-3206 Counsel for Defendant Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq. (by fax and U.S. Mail) Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Fax. 561 828 0983 Counsel for Defendant Robert D. Critton, Esq. (by fax and U.S. Mail) Michael J. Pike, Esq. Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman, LLP 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Fax. 561 515 3148 Co-Counsel for Jeffrey Epstein 4 EFTA00234472

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Flietit0A ()MO D.C. ELECT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80804-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, HALEY ROBSON, and SARAH KELLEN, Defendants. NOTICE OF REMOVAL July 18, 2008 STEVEN M. LARIMORF CLERK D.S. DIST. CT. S.O. OF FLA. • MIAMI In accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446, and 1332(a)(1), the defendants, Jeffrey Epstein, hereby remove this action' from Palm Beach County Circuit Court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and respectfully state as follows: Introduction Six months ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis "Fein 1059 044.444vEleuf Skim 340, E0coRuT Go

100p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-MarratIVIatthewman JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' NOTICE OF FILING THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL PRIVILEGE LOG Pursuant to the Court's June 18, 2013 Omnibus Order (DE 190), the Respondent, United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, hereby gives notice of its filing of its Third Supplemental Privilege Log. The index has been marked with Bates Numbers P-014924 thru P-015267. The documents referenced in the Third Supplemental Privilege Log will be delivered tomorrow to the Chambers of U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra for ex parte in camera review, pursuant to the Court's Omnibus Order. Respectfully submitted, WIFREDO A. FERRER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: s/A. Marie Villafafia A. MARIE VILLAFAFIA Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 South Australian Ave, Suite 40

446p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

eiasErg:08-cv

eiasErg:08-cv 1 2 3 80119-KAM Document 180 Entered UNITED STATES SOUTHERN DISTRICT WEST PALM CASE NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 Page 1 of 51 DISTRICT COURT OF FLORIDA BEACH DIVISION 4 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 5 JANE DOE, et al., 6 Plaintiffs, vs. JUNE 12, 2009 7 8 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 9 Defendant. 10 11 TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE APPEARANCES: 13 14 FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 15 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 16 For Jane Doe 17 BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 18 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 19 Jane Doe 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 954.522.3456 20 ISIDRO M. GARCIA, ESQ. 21 Garcia Elkins Boehringer 224 Datura Avenue 22 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Jane DOE II 561.832.8033 23 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQ. 24 2290 10th Avenue North Lake Worth, FL 33461

51p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/09/2009 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No.: 08-CIV-80893 - MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, 1. Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. / PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby responds to the motion by defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") to stay this action until late 2010. The motion for a stay should be denied. Defendant has not carried his heavy burden of justifying a stay in the action. A stay pending resolution of a related criminal prosecution is proper only when "special circumstances so require in the interests of justice." United States 1. Lot 5, Fox Grove, Alachua County, Fla., 23 F.3d 359, 364 (11th Cir. 1994) (internal quotations omitted). Of course, "The proponent of a stay bears the burden of establishing its need." Clinton I. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 708 (1997). To stay a civil action in light

14p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No.: 08-CIV-80893 - MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, 1. Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. / PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby brings this First Amended Complaint against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and states as follows: 1. This is an action for damages in an amount in excess of $50,000,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs. 2. This First Amended Complaint is brought under a fictitious name in order to protect the identity of Plaintiff, Jane Doe, because this Complaint makes allegations of sexual assault and child abuse of a then minor. 3. At all times material to this cause of action, Plaintiff, Jane Doe, was a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida. 4. At all times material to this cause of action, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, was a resident of the State

18p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

8p

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.