Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Epsteins Motion to Compel Discovery Responses from Edwards and Edwards Memorandum in Opposition to Epsteins Motion to Compel Discovery Responses Edwards Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Florida Statutes Section and and the following related filings a Epsteins Objection to Edwards Request for Judicial Notice and Epsteins Notice of Filing Supplemental Authority Edwards Motion in Limine Addressing Scope of Admissible Evidence and the following related filings a Edwards Supplement to Motion in Limine Addressing Scope of Admissible Evidence Epsteins Opposition to Edwards Motion in Limine Addressing Scope of Admissible Evidence and Edwards Second Supplement to Motion in Limine Addressing Scope of Admissible Evidence Edwards Objection to Notice of Production from Non-Parties and the following related filing a Epsteins Notice of Production from Non-Parties Epsteins Request for Judicial Notice Edwards Motion for Leave to Propound Limited Requests for Admission Edwards Notice of Filing Deposition Transcript Excerpts and Discovery Responses by Epstein Implicating the Fifth Amendment as to Sections II only Edwards Notice of Filing Deposition Transcript Excerpts and Discovery Responses by Epstein Implicating the Attorney-Client Privilege Edwards Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Florida Statutes Section and Edwards Notice of Filing Preliminary Objections and Counter Designations to Epsteins Deposition Designations Epsteins Motion for Leave to Disclose Expert Witness Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Stipulated Facts On June Epstein entered a guilty plea for one count of felony solicitation of prostitution a third-degree felony and one count of procuring a person under the age of for prostitution a second-degree felony Plea D.E Edwards was admitted to The Florida Bar in March Edwards Depo After being admitted to the Florida Bar Edwards worked as an Assistant State Attorney at the Broward State Attorneys Office for approximately three years Edwards Depo Edwards Depo After leaving the Broward State Attorneys Office Edwards went to work for the law firm of Kubicki Draper where he worked for approximately three years handling insurance defense matters Edwards Depo Edwards Depo Edwards formed a Florida limited liability company on April by the name of The Law Office of Brad Edwards Associates LLC Sunbiz.org Edwards began working at Rothstein Rosenfeldt and Adler P.A RRA in April Edwards Depo Edwards association with RRA terminated at the end of October or beginning of November Edwards Depo While an employee of RRA Edwards represented himself to the public including Epstein as a partner ofRRA Edwards Depo Scott Rothstein Rothstein was the managing partner and CEO of RRA Edwards Depo Rothstein voluntarily relinquished his law license in November and was disban-ed by the Florida Supreme Court on November Opinion The Florida Bar Rothstein Supreme Court of Florida Case No SC09 Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Rothstein was arrested and atTaigned in federal comi in Broward County Florida on December Information United States of America Rothstein United States District Comi Southern District of Florida Case No D.E In August and September while working at The Law Office of Brad Edwards Associates LLC Edwards filed three separate lawsuits against Epstein on behalf of three separate clients L.M E.W and Jai1e Doe Complaint Jane Doe Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court Southern District of Florida Case No D.E Complaint L.M Jeffrey Epstein th Judicial Circuit Comi Palm Beach County Case No D.E Complaint Jeffi Epstein th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E Epstein does not admit or deny the truth of the allegations in the lawsuit brought by Edwards when he was a sole practitioner on behalf of his three clients L.M E.W and Jane Doe However Epstein does not challenge Edwards good faith when he filed the lawsuits against Epstein While an employee ofRRA Edwards was the lead attorney on the L.M E.W and Jane Doe cases against Epstein Edwards Depo While an employee ofRRA Edwards was the sole employee of RRA who made strategic decisions on the L.M E.W and Jane Doe cases against Epstein Edwards Depo While an employee of RRA Edwards did not represent any individuals other than L.M E.W and Jane Doe with regard to claims against Epstein Edwards Depo Edwards Depo On July while Edwards was employed by RRA a Complaint was filed on behalf of L.M in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Complaint L.M Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court Southern District of Florida Case No D.E L.M already had a state court action pending against Epstein at the time the July federal Complaint was filed which was based on the same facts and circumstances Edwards Depo Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Edwards never formally served Epstein with the federal Complaint that was filed on behalf ofL.M against Epstein Edwards Depo L.M July federal Complaint against Epstein alleged that Epstein forced her into oral sex yet L.M testified that she never engaged in oral anal or vaginal intercourse with Epstein and she never touched his genitalia Edwards Answer to Complaint i D.E While Edwards was employed by RRA he made the decision to take the deposition of three pilots who had flown at different times airplanes used by Epstein and sought the deposition of a fourth pilot as paii of the litigation against Epstein Edwards Answer to Complaint i D.E On August L.M noticed the depositions of Epsteins pilots Lawrence Paul Visoski Jr and David Hart Rogers L.M requested they produce all original flight logs from January through present for any and all aircraft/airplanes/jets which they piloted or co-piloted that were owned or controlled by Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell Notices of Deposition and Subpoena Duces Tecums L.M Jeffrey Epstein 15th Judicial Circuit Palm Beach County Case No l-X-MB D.E In August while Edwards was employed by RRA he noticed the deposition of Donald Trump in the Jane Doe litigation and Re-Notices of Taking Videotaped Depositions Jane Doe Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court Southern District of Florida Case No While Edwards was employed by RRA he served Answers to Interrogatories on behalf of L.M and E.W indicating that he intended to call Bill Richardson who was the governor of New Mexico at the time as a trial witness as part of Edwards clients litigation against Epstein Edwards Answer to Complaint i D.E Edwards three clients L.M E.W and Jane Doe never testified that they had sex with a celebrity dignitary or international figure associated with Epstein Edwards Depo In August Edwards on behalf of his client E.W served a Request for Entry Upon Land seeking to inspect Epsteins entire home and property and to take videos Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page and photograph it Request for Entry Upon Land Jeffi Epstein th Judicial Circuit Palm Beach County Case No MB D.E On August the Court in the E.W matter noted that E.W.s request to inspect Epsteins entire home and property was withdrawn Order on Plaintiffs Request for Entry Upon Land Jeffrey Epstein th Judicial Circuit Palm Beach County Case No D.E In August and September Edwards on behalf of his client L.M served Notices of Production from Non-Parties evidencing his intent to obtain Epsteins medical records from Stephen Alexander Bruce Markowitz and Charles Galecki The Subpoenas sought the complete medical file including MRis scans X-rays and any other diagnostic test result Intake Form notes reports opinions con-espondence to or from third parties con-espondence to or from Jeffrey Epstein refen-als medical bills in short your complete file and Notice of Production from Non-Party L.M Jeffi Epstein 15th Judicial Circuit Palm Beach County Case No D.E On August Edwards on behalf of his client L.M served Notices of Production from Non-Pruiies evidencing his intent to obtain Epsteins prescription history from Lewis Pharmacy and Greens Pharmacy The Subpoenas sought a complete computer printout of any and all prescriptions for medication name and type of prescription and all other documentation or infom1ation on or regarding Jeffrey Epstein Notice of Production from Non-Party L.M Jeffi Epstein 15th Judicial Circuit Palm Beach County Case No D.E On April L.M before she was a client of Edwards provided a statement to the FBI In September while Edwards was employed by RRA his client L.M testified at a deposition in her case against Epstein On June Edwards on behalf of his Jane Doe client filed a Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Assets Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein and to Post a Million Bond to Secure Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Potential Judgment Motion Jane Doe No Jeffrey Epstein United States District Court Southern District of Florida Case No D.E In July Epstein settled the claims of Edwards three clients E.W L.M and Jane Doe Edwards Depo The Ponzi scheme through which Rothstein misrepresented claims and defrauded investors began in and ended in October Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem I United States Real Properties Purchased by Scott Rothstein United States District Court Southern District of Florida Case No D.E On November certain investors of Rothsteins Ponzi scheme sued Rothstein in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Court in and for Broward County Florida This lawsuit was paii of the public record as of the date it was filed Complaint Razorback Funding LLC et al Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Broward County Florida Case No The United States government filed an Information against Rothstein on or about December This criminal charge was public record as of the date it was filed Information United States of America Rothstein United States District Court Southern District of Florida Case No On December Epstein filed a civil Complaint in this action against Rothstein Edwards and L.M Complaint Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Comi Palm Beach County Case No D.E On December just days after Epstein instituted the civil proceeding Edwards filed a Counterclaim for abuse of process against Epstein Answer and Counterclaim Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Comi Palm Beach County Case No D.E Edwai represented L.M in this litigation Edwards Depo Edwards did not charge L.M for his representation of her in this litigation Edwards Depo Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Edwards did not enter into any written representation agreement with L.M concerning his representation of her in this litigation Edwards Depo On January a Default was entered against Rothstein in this litigation as to all claims in the December Complaint against Rothstein Default Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E In early August L.M and Epstein entered into a Stipulation for Order of Dismissal With Prejudice as to L.M Individually Only Stipulation Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E On August the Court entered a Final Order of Dismissal With Prejudice as to L.M Only approving L.M and Epsteins Stipulation Final Order Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E On January Epstein moved to amend his Complaint to eliminate certain paragraphs Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Complaint Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E On April Epstein filed an Amended Complaint against Rothstein and Edwards for abuse of process Amended Complaint Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E On August Epstein filed a Second Amended Complaint which was c01Tected on August bringing a claim for abuse of process against Edwards and for conspiracy to commit abuse of process against Rothstein Second Amended Complaint and Notice of Scriveners Error and CoITected Second Amended Complaint Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page On November Edwards moved for Final Summary Judgment on Epsteins Second Amended Complaint Renewed Motion for Final Summary Judgment Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E Edwards appeared in this action as his own co-counsel on March before the suit against him was dismissed Edwards Depo Notice of Appearance Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E On July the Court set the hearing on Edwards Renewed Motion for Final Summary Judgment to be held on August Order on Edwards Motion to Reschedule Hearing Jeffi Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E Epstein dismissed his claims without prejudice against Edwards on August Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Jeffrey Epstein Scott Rothstein et al th Judicial Circuit Court Palm Beach County Case No D.E Edwards income as a lawyer has been collectively greater from January to the present than it was from when Edwards started practicing law through January Edwards Depo Edwards is not claiming a loss of income as a result of his reputation being injured by Epsteins filing and continuation of this lawsuit Edwards Depo Edwards has not seen a doctor or taken any medication as a result of the anxiety caused by this lawsuit Edwards Depo Edwards Depo Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Statement of Issues of Fact for Determination at Trial Case Against Rothstein What if any damages were sustained by Epstein and proximately caused by Rothstein Edwards does not agree with this language for the reason that the issue as stated fails to tie causation to Rothsteins operation of the Ponzi scheme It is Edwards position that failure to limit the issue in this way as to Rothstein has the potential of confusing the jury in detennining whether Epstein had any probable cause to claim damages against Edwards arising out of the same circumstances Malicious Prosecution Counterclaim The following are issues of fact for detennination at trial on Edwards Counterclaim against Epstein A Epsteins Position Whether in December when Epstein instituted his civil proceeding against Edwards the facts and circumstances known to Epstein were not sufficiently strong to support a reasonable belief that the proceeding against Edwards was supported by existing facts and thus Epstein did not have probable cause to institute his civil proceeding This issue is based on the Standard Jury Instruction but Edwards disputes it is appropriate Edwards Alternate Position Whether in December when Epstein instituted his civil proceeding against Edwards the facts and circumstances known to Epstein were insufficient to support a belief on the part of a reasonably cautious person that Edwards had engaged in conduct that supported Epsteins claims against Edwards Epstein disputes this issue because it does not follow the Standard Jury Instruction The parties agree that in the absence of material disputed facts the issue of whether probable cause existed to support the institution of the civil proceeding brought by Epstein against Edwards is an issue of law to be determined by the Court If Epstein had probable cause to initiate the original civil proceeding against Edwards at the time the case was initially filed whether a reasonably cautious person would have continued to prosecute the civil proceeding Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page against Edwards based on new information acquired by Epstein after the case was filed The parties agree that in the absence of material disputed facts the issue of whether Epsteins claim against Edwards was maintained when probable cause no longer existed is an issue to be determined by the Court Epsteins Position Whether Epstein instituted or continued his civil proceeding against Edwards maliciously and without probable cause for the primary purpose of injuring Edwards or recklessly and without regard for whether the proceeding was justified This issue is based on the Standard Jury Instruction but Edwards disputes it is appropriate Edwards Alternate Position Whether Epstein instituted or continued his civil proceeding against Edwards with legal and/or actual malice Epstein disputes this issue because it does not follow the Standard Jury Instruction Epsteins Position Whether the continuation of the civil proceeding by Epstein against Edwards resulted directly and in natural and continuous sequence from Epsteins actions and but for Epsteins actions the proceeding would not have been continued Edwards disagrees that this is an issue and is of the position that having conceded that Epstein is responsible for initiating the claim and having waived any advice of counsel defense it is impossible for Epstein to contend that responsibility for maintenance of the action up until the time of its voluntary dismissal is attributable to anyone but Epstein himself Whether Epsteins civil proceeding against Edwards was terminated in favor of Edwards Edwards contends this is a legal issue for determination by the Court Whether the institution or continuation of the civil proceeding by Epstein against Edwards was a substantial contributing cause of damage to Edwards and but for the malicious institution or continuation of the proceeding Edwards damage would not have occun-ed What amount of money if any will fairly and adequately compensate Edwards for his compensatory damages that resulted from Epsteins institution or continuation of the civil proceeding against Edwards Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page Whether Epstein was guilty of intentional misconduct reckless disregard or gross negligence which was a substantial cause of Edwards damages I Whether punitive damages are warranted as punishment to Epstein for instituting or continuing his civil proceeding against Edwards and/or as a deterrent to others from filing a civil proceeding without probable cause Whether the claimed damage is a result of statements made after the institution of the civil proceeding and are thus protected by the litigation privilege even if any such statements are found to be untrue This issue is based on the Standard Jury Instruction but Edwards disputes it is appropriate because he believes Epsteins Amended Complaints are statements made after the institution of the civil proceeding and are afforded no protection by the litigation privilege Bifurcated Proceeding What amount if any should be assessed against Epstein for punitive damages as a punishment for instituting or continuing his civil proceeding against Edwards and/or as a deterrent to others Exhibit Lists with Objections The parties do not waive their right to amend their Exhibit Lists and to identify additional objections for those exhibits that have not yet been disclosed and/or provided to co1Tespond with the parties respective Exhibit Lists Edwards Exhibit List and Epsteins Objections are attached as Composite Exhibit A Epsteins Exhibit List and Edwards Objections are attached as Composite Exhibit Witness Lists The parties do not waive their right to amend their Witness Lists Edwards Witness List is attached as Exhibit Epsteins Witness List is attached as Exhibit Estimated Trial Time Edwards estimates trial days Epstein estimates trial days Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page I Names Addresses and Telephone Numbers of Attorneys to Trv the Case For Jeffrey Epstein Scott Link Kara Berard Rockenbach Link Rockenbach PA Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard Suite West Palm Beach FL Telephone For Bradley Edwards Jack Scarola David Vitale Jr Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley P.A Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach FL Telephone Number of Peremptory Challenges Per Party Three Each Partys proposed iury instructions and verdict form with citations to supporting authorities Edwards proposed jury instructions and verdict fo1m are attached as Composite Exhibit Epsteins proposed jury instructions and verdict form are attached as Composite Exhibit Epstein Rothstein and Edwards Case No Joint Pretrial Stipulation Page DATED December SEARCY DENNY SCAROLA BARNHART SHIPLEY P.A akes Boul We searcylaw.com mep searcylaw.com scarolateam searcylaw.com sel for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards LINK ROCKENBACH PA Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard Suite West Palm Beach FL fax By Isl Scott Link with permission Scott Link FBN Kara Berard Rockenbach FBN Angela Many FBN Primary Scott linkrocklaw.com Primary Kara linkrocklaw.com Primary Angela linkrocklaw.com Secondary Tina linkrocklaw.com Secondary Troy linkrocklaw.com Secondary Tanya linkrocklaw.com Secondary Eservice linkrocklaw.com Trial Counsel for PlaintffjlCounter Defendant Jeffiey Epstein A A 4A E0 A4 DE a qr?q rq qrCX HhL Kg lg d?a d6U a M3 flW y??S 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 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 i P!e i I CTX rC YY I 1e 2j 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 K?i N?M?qr EeD k??O d6 I I i i CTX GH FT 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
