Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta01195203DOJ Data Set 9Other

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 317 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2015 Page 1 of 4

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta01195203
Pages
4
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 317 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2015 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENT TO REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LIMITED INTERVENTION BY ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ Alan M. Dershowitz, through undersigned counsel, hereby files his Motion for Leave to File Supplement to Reply in Support of Motion for Limited Intervention. In support thereof, Professor Dershowitz states as follows: 1. On January 5, 2015, in response to the defamatory, outrageous, and impertinent allegations made against him in Petitioners' filings, Professor Dershowitz filed a Motion for Limited Intervention for the purposes of moving to strike the outrageous and impertinent allegations made against him. (See D.E. ## 282 and 285). Following Petitioners' response, (D.E. # 291), Professor Dershowitz filed his Reply in Support of Motion for Limited Intervention, (D.E. # 306), on February 2, 2015. The Motion for Limited Intervention is presently pending before this Court. 2. Subsequently, on February 6, 2015, Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 filed their Protective Motion Pursuant to Rule 15 to Amend Their Petition to Conform to Existing Evidence and to Add Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4 as Petitioners (D.E. # 311). On that same day, Petitioners filed their Reply in Support of Motion Pursuant to Rule 21 for Joinder in Action. EFTA01195203 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 317 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2015 Page 2 of 4 (D.E. # 310), to which they attached, as an Exhibit, the February 5, 2015 Declaration of Jane Doe No. 3, (D.E. # 310-1). 3. Professor Dershowitz now seeks leave of this Court to supplement his previously filed Reply in Support of his Motion for Limited Intervention. Good cause for such filing exists because Professor Dershowitz was unable to address the most recent declaration of Jane Doe No. 3 in his initial Reply in Support of Motion for Limited Intervention because that document was filed along with, and cited in, documents filed by Petitioners after Professor Dershowitz filed his Reply in Support of Motion for Limited Intervention. 4. Jane Doe No. 3's declaration demonstrates that she is not being truthful with respect to her claims against Professor Dershowitz. This is manifestly pertinent to the issue of Professor Dershowitz's limited intervention in this matter because Professor Dershowitz seeks to intervene in this case for the sole purpose of defending against scurrilous allegations and protecting his good name. 5. Accordingly, Professor Dershowitz seeks leave to file a brief supplement, which is attached, in which he supplements his reply in response to the filings by Jane Doe No. 3. WHEREFORE, non-party Alan M. Dershowitz respectfully requests leave to file his Supplement to Reply in Support of Motion for Limited Intervention, attached as Exhibit I. COMPLIANCE WITH S.D. FLA. L.R. 7.1(a)(3) Prior to the filing of this Motion, counsel for Professor Dershowitz contacted counsel for the Petitioners and the Government in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this Motion. Counsel for Petitioners have advised that they oppose the supplemental filing. Counsel for the Government has advised that the Government has no objection to Professor Dershowitz's request to supplement. 2 EFTA01195204 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 317 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2015 Page 3 of 4 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Kendall Coffey Kendall Coffey, Fla. Bar No. 259681 Gabriel Groisman Fla. Bar No. 25644 Benjamin H. Brodsky. Fla. Bar No. 73748 COFFEY BURLINGTON, P.L. 2601 South Bayshore Drive, PHI Miami, Florida 33133 Telephone; Facsimile: - and — Thomas Scott. Fla. Bar No. 149100 COLE, SCOTT & KISSANE, P.A. Dadeland Centre II 9150 South Dadeland Boulevard, Suite 1400 Miami, Florida 33156 Telephone: Facsimile: Counsel for Prof Alan M. Dershowitz 3 EFTA01195205 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 317 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2015 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served by Notice of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF, on this 12th day of March, 2015, on all counsel or parties of record on the Service List below. /s/ Kendall Coffey SERVICE LIST Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale. Florida 33301 Telephon Facsimil E-mail: and Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 S. 1400 E. Lake Salt Lake Cit UT 84112 Telephone: Facsimile: E-Mail: Attorneys for Jane Doe #1, Z 3, and 4 Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafaila UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Fax: E-mail: E-mail: Attorneys for the Government 4 EFTA01195206

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Case #9:08-CV-80736-KAM

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 312 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/23/2015 Page 1 of 3

3p
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 10CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01695623

0p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01308033

23p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing,

Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos £t Lehrman, P.L. 'Ovid Pam ftoisl pet WWW.PATITTOJUSTKE.COM 425 North Andrews Avenue • Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 4 00 "ti e 6.‘ tk i r atire CalkAllfle alvdtr aIINNEV rar ,NYTTENNINIP PITNEY 'OWES 02 !F $003 , 50 0 000i3V, wit JAN 2i 2,2!3 .a4P En M ZIP t20-12E 3330 Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafatia 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 EFTA00191396 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, 1. UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT EFTA00191397 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT MOTION TO SEAL Petitioners Jane Doc No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2, joined by movants Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4, move to file the attached pleading and supporti

71p
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

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.