TONJA HADDAD PA

TONJA HADDAD PA 315 SE 7th Street elephone Suite 301 facsimile Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 May 6, 2013 Via Electronic Service only Matthew D. Weissing, Esq. Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman 425 N Andrews Avenue Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Re: Epstein v. Rothstein, Edwards, et aL Dear Mr. Weissing: We are in receipt of your Motion for Protective Order dated April 30, 2013 and have reviewed same. In a good-faith effort to obviate the need for a Protective Order and/or to narrow the issues you raise therein, assuming they are raised only as to the requests directed at Fanner Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman; to wit: items numbered three, four, five, and six on Schedule A; we submit the following: First, it is essential that you realize that it is Mr. Edwards, not my client, who places all of this requested financial information at issue with his spurious claims of damages. Mr. Edwards's allegations of injury to his reputation, loss of time diverted from his professional responsibilities, embarrassment, mental anguish, and anxiety all must, as you are well aware, be quantified in order for him to prevail. While we submit that Mr. Edwards has suffered no damages whatsoever, the only way to quantify these claims is to review the requested financial information to discern whether defending the lawsuit filed by Mr. Epstein had any impact at all on Mr. Edwards's mental health, his income, and/or his ability to generate business for your firm. Accordingly, all records reflecting same are necessary for Mr. Edwards to prove, and for us to properly evaluate, his claims. If you do not wish to turn them over, then I suggest that Mr. Edwards withdraw his claim for damages. Nevertheless, we are not unsympathetic to your desire to preserve confidentiality; especially that which belongs to your clients, who are non-parties to this suit. Likewise, we have no interest whatsoever in your clients' personal information. Accordingly, we are happy to accept the following as responsive to Item Number 4 in the Schedule A to which you refer in your Motion: a breakdown of the award/settlement amount, the name of the originating attorney, and the name(s) of other attorneys who worked on the case. We will agree that you can redact the client's name, case number, or any other identifying information as it relates to the client. Although your firm does seem to relish advertising its big wins on its website, its Facebook page, in the Daily Business Review, and in other legal publications (notwithstanding your stated concerns regarding EFTA01111434 confidentiality), it is necessary that we look beyond the advertised propaganda in order to properly assess Mr. Edwards's allegations of mental anguish and economic loss. While we submit that our requests are narrowly tailored and drafted for the sole purpose of ascertaining that essential information, we are willing to modify the requests for the protection of your clients' confidentiality, so long as we are able to acquire the necessary information. Next, regarding your concern over providing both Mr. Edwards's Partnership/Member Agreement with your firm and your firm's tax returns as requested, we again offer that you may redact any information in those documents related to the identity of your clients. I am confident you are aware of the well-established law that when a party voluntarily puts his financial information at issue, it becomes relevant to the litigation, and the courts will compel production. While I appreciate that Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman is not a party to this litigation, your Member Mr. Edwards is, and it is he, and he alone, who has placed your firm's finances at issue with his allegations of damages. Mr. Epstein filed suit against Mr. Edwards at the end of 2009, and Mr. Edwards almost immediately thereafter filed this Counterclaim. In order to discern any alleged financial impact the lawsuit has had on Mr. Edwards as he contends in his Counterclaim, it is necessary for us to properly and professionally review the financial records of your firm, which was Mr. Edwards's primary source of employment during the relevant time period. Because this suit was commenced while Mr. Edwards was a Member at your firm, there can be no dispute regarding the validity of our request for this information and its relevance to our evaluation and defense of Mr. Edwards's claims. Please feel free to contact my office to discuss this further. Sincerely, TONJA HADDAD, PA L_ Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. for the firm cc: Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack Goldberger, Esq. Fred Haddad, Esq. EFTA01111435