JEFFREY EPSTEIN Plaintiff vs SCOTT ROTHSTEIN individually BRADLEY EDWARDS individually and L.M individually Defendant I IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA DEFENDANT/COUNT ERP LAIN TIFFS RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING LEGAL AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO COUNTERDEFENDANTS MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND/OR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON EDWARDS COUNTERCLAIM FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS Defendant/Counterplaintiff Bradley Edwards files this Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Jeffrey Epsteins Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment on Edwards Counterclaim for Abuse of Process and states Epstein is a convicted felon having entered into a plea agreement pursuant to which he effectively conceded his having engaged in illicit sexual activity with a large number of female children See Counterclaim at A large number of his victims have filed civil suits many of which remain pending and which potentially subject Epstein to large judgments for both compensatory and punitive damages Counterclaim at Edwards clients including L.M are among those victims who continue the prosecution of their claims against Epstein Counterclaim at Epstein has no substantive defense to these claims as he has repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to answer any substantive questions regarding his m/y t0 I F/Z V/j 1a qC KS u?v vZ O5 a qr rCX qC 0V I I dc rM?M rM 10Cy n??m?n k?o?h I A I w?!ac qr MCX 10Cy ITy qr M3 Ґ??1rA5R h?H?T3P K?z X?K H?o I Idc rM?M rM 10Cy f헊?f?Tz e?e:Aa I v"x i X5 EO5 5a r?q CX 9r Cy rq rqC M3 ş?:c p/p0 5H V)V 6T Y2 G5 qrM?r?qr?r9 q?10Cy rCX qr l1 X?l 3K fm?Q Z2f CX CX gT L??T 2E Cy 3P EM3 J4T L?h??M q?ᡚ?Y r??O?rJt CTX X0T1i k3v Jh/e0h1 H(K W/Q0 CTX j?!k 5B r2 CTX A A A 4v z"p A A A0A?A AK CTX A A?!k CX qCX YCX i!d A fi8 l8 yuZ 6L pH m?c sP;0 6ZR Ni P0 0Q X(P0s s(s p0 Pp CTX qq dR B/J Va A N?q qr NEeD d6 I I i i CTX I CTX U3 U3 U3 U3 S6 E"L I I I5K7C:I 9O U3 Cn qrr qr q??r?q 9qr CTX G5 qr CX rC l0 WS zN pf1 ODV8L?m jC1DxV CTX CTX A qr 10Cy rYY Ң??P?V CTX C"C rqM?rq?q?qr qr CTX YY Jb?C.y CTX CTX GG4 A A G5 C.C M??r 10Cy rq YY C?J?yO c/XE?lgF GM??H p?ݡG Dp9Oh CTX CTX CJ4 I J6 CJ4 CK qrrM?q qq 9/CX?o CX qYqr rC dd?Z c6S ttcx A CTX CTX 10Cy rq rqYY X?qiX:4 3J Db ZH uD-8 1g?BH I vS 7Oo7u E?K?O J6 UJP U0 UT??ʴ UT UT UT O(p U(u UF1 iZ qr?r CX CX Yr zKW:E A K5M P-M UW VW L1J KJ56 N/Q SQ rC 6J ߵl ߵl 5TZ w8ĥDG oj?K _4 N)?Y Hp pRqc?W26 vz?WBrz?ZB??3X H4 CTX A CTX X4 U5 P8 5D qr qr 10Cy qr YY Mo?ANp D01jJ 9F bzEV 4O 8V CTX O!o CTX KK AA qr A C5 qr rYY 1A?CC V9 a c?F CTX A G5 qr EeD?M CTX 9?rY 10Cy rq qY ȠX1 a f??B CTX 9F I CTX 6D N?qr rrqq qC O?J RmA??b"0 M?.F q?D B?G CTX CTX F4 d6P A F4 qr rYY 4G AV8 CTX UY UL0 U0 U0 U0 UF UF UFAGA UA UA UAL UL UL UL UL UL UL U7 U7 U7 U7 U7 U7 U7 2EH GTU U/U OUoU UV G1 CTX TUV 1G 7A UA UAL X7 U7 U7 U77XL UL UL ULLYX KTX 8Y GJ A UMAT UD 7M GVW GF10 MWA LL MPM M?M 4M XY qr qr qr NEeD 10Cy qYY E2 GH l1 Pd h3V g?KIq V5kL O65S d_xKKU vV 5H p1 Z6 CTX U0 U1 CTX U0 U1 A0 1D qr qr 10Cy YY K??Kl 1B AMwv 1K F1 KV yW Gd T?H CTX CTX I CK M?qr K?SK?PQZ I IRZX 8YCX 10Cy qr CX kv zg S5kB??a iG wA CTX U2 6Y CTX U2 6Y I K,,j j,s 6Y P!p qr 10Cy qr YY G?O 9K mSd X0 9r?yal 1d bY0 XNf??qN D?J CTX P!Z b!o C,C qrM 10Cy qr8 I fX2 9R lO KV CTX Oo CTX A qr r?qr rq YY Lsy7H4 C,6E IL CTX U3 CTX J,O3_3xx qrM?r q?CX Y9/C 9CX CTX Y10Cy CX CX CX YC YY FV uTl bEWa ȓjJ-8 Gc G??Q9E 9Wq CTX CTX Up i I A 9_ qr qr YY D.X 7s F??Y bc3_c iH CTX CTX A qr 10Cy YY EMq 7H AY mK9Z BY A2 P6L N7 CTX CTX a I I i qr rC CTX CTX 7O I FMM qr qr i I I3 CTX Z6 I L(K4 P:u Z6P CTX y8 Case No Defendant/Counterplaintiffs Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Counterdefendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment Page of8 sexual exploitation of his minor victims Counterclaim at Epstein has employed the extraordinary financial resources at his disposal to intimidate his victims into abandoning or compromising their legitimate claims Id Epstein has initiated claims against Edwards and L.M for the sole purpose of intimidating Edwards L.M and others to abandon legitimate claims against Epstein or to coerce them into settling these claims for less than their value Counterclaim at Epsteins Complaint alleges that Edwards was a knowing participant in a civil theft and criminal enterprise Counterclaim at Epstein is well aware that there is no evidence to support these false assertions Id Epsteins actions in filing his baseless lawsuit are tantamount to extortion and form the basis for Edwards Counterclaim for abuse of process Judgment on the pleadings should be granted only where the Court concludes based upon the pleadings alone that the movant is clearly entitled to judgment as a matter of law after taking every fact alleged by the non-moving party as true and all facts alleged by the moving party and denied by the non-moving party as false See Harris Kearney So 2d Fla 4th DCA In most instances a motion for judgment on the pleadings will end up being much the same in practice as a motion to dismiss although made after an answer is served The pleadings in this case establish a cause of action for abuse of process A cause of action for abuse of process requires proof of the following elements the defendant made an illegal improper or perverted use of process the defendant had an ulterior motive or purpose Epstein previously filed a Motion For More Definite Statement and/or Motion to Dismiss with respect to Edwards Counterclaim The motion was denied While the prior motion did not raise the same grounds raised herein it is worth noting that this Court previously determined that Counterplaintiffs Counterclaim could stand Case No Defendant/Counterplaintiffs Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Counterdefendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment Page of8 in exercising the illegal improper or perverted process and the plaintiff was injured as a result of defendants action Della-Donna Nova Univ Inc So.2d Fla 4th DCA In an abuse of process action process may mean an action that is initiated independently such as the commencement of a suit or one initiated collaterally such as an attachment or the filing of a counterclaim Peckins Kaye So 2d Fla 2d DCA The gravamen of the cause of action involves the use of process to accomplish some wrongful purpose for which it was not designed Id see also Scozari Barone So 2d Fla 3d DCA The usual case involves some form of extortion Scozari So 2d at citing Rothmann Harrington So 2d Fla 3d DCA The allegations contained in Edwards Counterclaim which must be taken as true for purposes of deciding a motion for judgment on the pleadings establish these necessary elements The Counterclaim alleges that Epstein has commenced a lawsuit against Edwards for the sole purpose of attempting to intimidate Edwards and his clients including L.M into either abandoning or settling legitimate claims for less than their just and reasonable value See Counterclaim at and The Counterclaim also alleges that Epsteins Complaint has no basis in law or fact and that Edwards has been injured as a result Counterclaim at and Edwards acknowledges that there is no abuse of process when the process is used to accomplish the result for which it was intended regardless of an incidental or concurrent motive of spite or ulterior purpose such as harassment Scozari So 2d at However in this case it is alleged that the claims against Edwards for participating in a civil theft and criminal enterprise have no factual basis or legal merit whatsoever i.e Epsteins lawsuit was not filed to Case No Defendant/Counterplaintiffs Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Counterdefendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment Page of8 accomplish the result intended to either prevail or settle a meritorious claim Indeed Epstein completely ignored the statutory requirement for written notice prior to the initiation of a civil theft claim Counterclaim at This is one manner in which the cases cited by Epstein are distinguishable Additionally many of the cases cited by Epstein note that the mere filing a complaint with an ulterior motive of harassment will not alone constitute abuse of process However Counterplaintiff allegations involve more than mere harassment they involve allegations of an attempt by Epstein to coerce Edwards into compromising the legitimate claims his clients have against Epstein for molestation Even the cases cited by the Counterdefendant recognize that allegations of a coercive or collateral effect like the kind set forth in Edwards counterclaim will be sufficient For example in Miami Herald Publishing Co Ferre F.Supp S.D Fla the Court notes that an improper motive is not sufficient and explains that what is needed is an allegation of a collateral coercive effect Quoting McMurray U-Haul Co So 2d Fla th DCA the Ferre Court states that An abuse of process arises only when there has been a perversion of court processes to accomplish some end which the process was not intended by law to accomplish or which compels the party against whom it has been used to do some collateral thing which he could not legally and regularly be compelled to do The case of Scozari supra is instructive In Scozari an attorney was sued for abuse of process after filing an action to impose an equitable lien and lis pendens against the home of his clients former live-in boyfriend who had left the state with the couples child So 2d at The Third District held that summary judgment should not have been entered where the lawyers Case No Defendant/Counterplaintiffs Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Counterdefendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment Page of8 own testimony indicated that he filed the action at least in part as a bargaining chip The Court noted If there was a reasonable basis in law and fact to initiate the judicial proceedings then these processes were justified even though they may have served some other collateral purpose However if there was no reasonable basis in law and fact to bring the action to impress a lien on property and this was done without any reasonable justification under the law and to force or compel the appellant to resolve some custody dispute induce the appellant to pay money or tie up the appellants property then there has been an abuse of process emphasis added Id at Likewise the counterclaim in this case alleges that Epstein filed this action with no reasonable basis in law or fact in order to force or compel Edwards to resolve other pending cases against Epstein See also Rothmann supra So 2d at noting that in an abuse of process claim the improper purpose usually takes the form of coercion to obtain a collateral advantage not properly involved in the proceeding itself such as the surrender of property or the payment of money by the use of the process as a threat or club Based upon the foregoing authorities the pleadings in this matter set forth a cause of action for abuse of process and Epsteins Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings must be denied Epstein has also moved for summary judgment on Edwards abuse of process claim It is axiomatic that summary judgment may not be granted unless the moving party is able to show that no genuine issues of material fact exist Payne Cudjoe Gardens Property Owners Ass Inc So 2d Fla 3d DCA Epstein has failed to establish an absence of the disputed issues of fact created by the pleadings Furthermore summary judgment is premature because discovery is not complete Epstein just answered the counterclaim on March Where discovery is not complete the facts are not sufficiently developed to enable the trial court Case No Defendant/Counterplaintiffs Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Counterdefendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment Page of8 to determine whether genuine issues of material facts exist Id see also Singer Star So 2d Fla th DCA As the court noted in Payne supra So.2d at Where discovery is not complete the facts are not sufficiently developed to enable the trial court to determine whether genuine issues of material facts exist See Singer Star So.2d Fla 4th DCA Thus where discovery is still pending the entry of summary judgment is premature See Smith Smith So.2d Fla 5th DCA Parties to lawsuit are entitled to discovery as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure including the taking of depositions and it is reversible error to enter summary judgment when discovery is in progress and the deposition of party is pending Henderson Reyes So.2d Fla 3d DCA reversing the entry of Summary Judgment where depositions had not been completed and request for the production of documents was outstanding Collazo Hupert So.2d Fla 3d DCA holding that a trial court should not entertain motion for summary judgment while discovery is still pending Spradley Stick So.2d Fla 1st DCA See also Brandauer Publix Supermarkets Inc So 2d Fla 2nd DCA abuse of discretion to grant summary judgment where opposing party has not had an opportunity to complete discovery Wherefore the Defendant/Counterplaintiff Bradley Edwards respectfully requests this Court to enter an Order denying Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Jeffrey Epsteins Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment on Edwards Counterclaim for Abuse of Process Case No Defendant/Counterplaintiffs Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Counterdefendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment Page of8 I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by U.S Mail to all counsel on the attached list this day of I Jack Flo ar No Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley P.A Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach Florida Phone Fax Attorneys for Plaintiff Case No Defendant/Counterplaintiffs Response and Supporting Legal Authorities in Opposition to Counterdefendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and/or Motion for Summary Judgment Page of8 Jack A Goldberger Esquire Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A COUNSEL LIST Australian A venue South Suite West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Robert Critton Jr Esquire Burman Critton Luttier Coleman LLP Banyan Boulevard Suite West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Gary Farmer Esq Farmer Jaffe Weissing et al Andrews Avenue Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Fax Attorneys for Defendant L.M Law Offices of Marc Nurik One East Broward Boulevard Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Fax Counsel for Scott Rothstein
