Filing E-Filed PM JEFFREY EPSTEIN Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant SCOTT ROTHSTEIN individually and BRADLEY EDWARDS individually Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA Case No PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEINS RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF BRADLEY EDWARDS SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION IN LIMINE ADDRESSING SCOPE OF ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Epstein opposes Defendant/Counter Plaintiff Bradley Edwards Edwards December Second Supplement to Motion in Limine Addressing Scope of Admissible Evidence D.E and states INTRODUCTION Edwards seeks to prevent Epstein from introducing any testimony and evidence regarding the criminal misconduct that occurred with the Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler law firm RRA during the six months that he was employed there but that was not known to Epstein until after December Epstein agrees that the existence of probable cause for initiating a claim is determined based on information known at the time the original civil proceeding is filed However Edwards counsel placed the continuation of probable cause at issue before this Court at a recent hearing Additionally Edwards counsel added the continuation of the original civil proceeding FILED PALM BEACH COUNTY FL SHARON BOCK CLERK PM as an issue in the parties Pretrial Stipulation D.E IC.2.B The Pretrial Stipulation specifically recognizes that the continuation must be based on evidence and information that was learned subsequent to the original filing Id Therefore it makes no logical sense and would in fact be reversible error to hold that Epstein cannot offer evidence to the jury of his reasons for continuing the lawsuit As for Edwards invocation of the absolute litigation privilege the privilege may be an affirmative defense to an abuse of process action where the conditions of the absolute privilege are satisfied however this is not an abuse of process action What is material to this case is that not all of the conditions of the absolute litigation privilege were satisfied on the facts alleged in Epsteins Corrected Second Amended Complaint Significant to this case and Epstein having probable cause to continue with this suit against Edwards was Judge Crows finding when he denied Edwards Motion to Dismiss Epsteins Second Amended Complaint Edwards Motion to Dismiss asserted the litigation privilege as an absolute bar to Epsteins cause of action The Court found that the absolute litigation privilege did not bar this proceeding and found that Epsteins allegations were sufficient to plead a cause of action for abuse of process Exhibit A Thus the litigation privilege does not serve to bar Epstein from offering testimony and evidence to support his good-faith belief that Edwards was engaged in litigation misconduct that bore no relation to the claims of Edwards clients and thus provided Epstein with a reasonable basis to believe in the connection between Rothsteins Ponzi scheme and Edwards misconduct ARGUMENT Edwards Placed the Continuation of Epsteins Original Civil Proceeding at Issue Which Entitles Epstein to Def end by Introducing Evidence that Formed the Basis for His Continuing Probable Cause Edwards has the burden of establishing by the greater weight of the evidence that Epstein commenced and continued the judicial proceeding against him without probable cause See Burns GCC Beverages Inc So 2d Fla Endacott Int Hospitality Inc So 2d Fla 3d DCA plaintiff must show that probable cause was lacking at all stages of the underlying proceeding A civil litigant has probable cause to bring a suit when he has a reasonable belief based on facts and circumstances known to him in the validity of the claim Wright Yurko So 2d Fla th DCA citing Goldstein Sabella So 2d Fla A litigant may rely on first-hand knowledge or trustworthy information that was provided to him Gill Kostrojf Supp 2d M.D Fla Significantly counsel for Epstein Scott Link at a recent hearing indicated that Edwards burden was proving no probable cause at the time Epstein filed the original civil proceeding and Edwards counsel Jack Scarola corrected him and stated We contend there was no probable cause to continue the proceeding The initiation and continuation of the proceeding caused damage to Bradley Edwards both because no probable cause ever existed So it was both initiated and continued in the absence of probable cause Tr Additionally the parties Joint Pretrial Stipulation submitted after that hearing identified the continuation as an issue of fact for determination at trial on Edwards Counterclaim against Epstein Excerpts of the December hearing transcript are attached as Exhibit 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 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 D.E e.s Clearly any and all of the testimony and evidence that supports Epsteins probable cause for the initiation and continuation of his original civil proceeding against Rothstein and Edwards is admissible The evidence and testimony Epstein seeks to introduce tends to show Rothsteins connection to Edwards and the cases Edwards was litigating against Epstein specifically during the six-month period in which Rothstein was alleged by Ponzi scheme investors to be using those same Epstein cases to defraud them Even if such evidence was discovered by Epstein after the initiation of the original civil proceeding against Rothstein and Edwards the allegations of the Ponzi scheme investors were known to Epstein prior to initiating the original suit and Epsteins subsequent discovery of such evidence served to corroborate those allegations and supported Epsteins probable cause to have continued the original suit Any judicial limitation on Epsteins efforts to introduce that testimony and evidence at trial would interfere with Epsteins right to defend against Edwards erroneous assertion that Epstein lacked probable cause to continue this action and would be reversible error The Absolute Litigation Privilege Does Not Apply to Edwards Edwards wants the Court to find that Epstein could not have had probable cause to initiate the civil proceeding because the conduct upon which Epstein based his Complaint against Edwards Edwards abuse of process in the civil lawsuits Edwards brought on behalf of his three clients against Epstein is absolutely protected by the litigation privilege such that any such conduct could not have formed the basis for any claim against Edwards Under this thought process for the absolute privilege to preclude a showing of probable cause by Epstein then Edwards would need to show that Epstein knew when he initiated the civil proceeding and at all times before he filed his Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice that the litigation privilege precluded every cause of action asserted therein without any possibility that his claims would survive In August in his Supplement to Motion to Dismiss Epsteins Second Amended Complaint Edwards argued that the litigation privilege was an absolute bar to Epsteins claims Exhibit The Court disagreed with this argument and found that Epsteins allegations in support of his abuse of process claims were sufficient to plead a cause of action D.E Exhibit A Thus in continuing his action Epstein had a reasonable basis to believe the absolute litigation privilege did not apply Judge Crows Order two years after the filing of the original Complaint denying Edwards Motion to Dismiss Epsteins Second Amended Complaint is compelling evidence that Epstein had a reasonable basis for continuing with the lawsuit The absolute litigation privilege does not apply to prevent Epstein from defending his continuation of the original civil proceeding against Rothstein and Edwards If Epstein sued Edwards for some statement or act performed during litigation between them Edwards might have this privilege available as an affirmative defense to that action if the conduct occurred during that proceeding and it related to that action However Edwards is seeking to apply the absolute litigation privilege to his conduct in representing clients in other actions against Epstein for work he performed that had no relationship to the furtherance of those matters If the conduct that forms the basis of the complaint does not relate to the proceedings in which that conduct took place then the conduct would not be covered by the litigation privilege and it could serve as a basis for probable cause to bring a claim Levin Middlebrooks Mabie Thomas Mayes Mitchell P.A United States Fire Ins Co So 2d Fla Epsteins Complaints identified numerous instances of conduct by Edwards that were outside the parameters of the litigation privilege Acts that bear no relation to and are not in furtherance of a judicial proceeding do not have immunity Levin at Where judicial process is being perverted immunity would impede not further the interests protected by the judicial privilege Gen Refractories Co Firemans Fund Ins Co F.3d 3d Cir Epstein is allowed to defend by showing the jury that what appeared to be abusive litigation behavior on Edwards part had no apparent relationship to the furtherance of his clients claims exhaustive fourteen hours of depositions of pilots who Edwards knew had no interaction with Edwards three clients a motion to the federal court for Epstein to post a million bond because of alleged asset diversion which the court denied finding it devoid of evidence the filing of a page federal court complaint when a state court action was already pending and requests for depositions of former President Clinton now President Trump and other notable friends or acquaintances of Epstein These unusual litigation tactics combined with information known by Epstein formed the basis for his probable cause to question whether a connection between Rothstein and Edwards existed Furthermore Edwards intends to present evidence and testimony to prove the validity of his clients claims and the propriety of his overzealous litigation conduct of which Epstein has complained to establish that Epstein had no probable cause to initiate and continue his action against Edwards The Court should not allow Edwards to use the absolute litigation privilege to bar Epstein from introducing contrary evidence particularly where the contrary evidence includes an Order from Judge Crow ruling that Epsteins Second Amended Complaint properly stated a cause of action for abuse of process It would be a tortured application of the Florida Supreme Courts Levin decision to allow Edwards to bar Epstein from presenting his defense and constitutes reversible error CONCLUSION Epstein respectfully requests that Edwards Second Supplement to Motion in Limine Addressing Scope of Admissible Evidence be denied CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that the foregoing document has been furnished to the attorneys listed on the Service List below on January through the Courts e-filing portal pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration Jack Scarola LINK ROCKENBACH PA Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard Suite West Palm Beach Florida fax By Isl Scott Link 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 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein SERVICE LIST Nichole Segal Searcy Denny Scarola Barnhart Shipley P.A Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard Burlington Rockenbach P.A Courthouse Commons Suite West Railroad A venue West Palm Beach FL mep searcylaw.com jsx searcylaw.com scarolateam searcylaw.com Co-Counsel for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards West Palm Beach FL njs FLAppellateLaw.com kbt FLAppellateLaw.com Co-Counsel for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards Bradley Edwards Marc Nurik Edwards Pottinger LLC Law Offices of Marc Nurik Andrews Avenue Suite One Broward Boulevard Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Ft Lauderdale FL brad epllc.com marc nuriklaw.com staff.efile pathtojustice.com Counsel for Defendant Scott Rothstein Co-Counsel for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Bradley Edwards Jack A Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A Australian A venue Suite West Palm Beach FL goldberger agwpa.com smahoney agwpa.com Co-Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein EXHIBIT A i IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE RiF.TEENTH JtJDICIAL CJ CUIT OF FLORIDA IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY i CIVIL DIVISION JEFFREY EPSTEIN Plain tiff vs scan ROTHSTEIN etc et at Defendimt CASE NO AG the truthf lness oftl1e allega i ns against the Defenciant,:af i.rmative defenses t11at may be availal:Ue to lhe Defe dant EDWARDS as well.as the references outsid;"the four comers I I I I I of the Compl nt These matters are ore appropriateiy the subJectmatter a Motjonfor summary Jtidgme 267ntarid or 267q_efense at a1 Based 265pon the foregoing the Mption to Dis iss is hereby nied DQNE AND ORP RED fhis of tobef at.W alniB 242ach Palm Beach Couno 267F.lorida DAVID CROW Copy umlsheci CIRCurr OURT j:r JACK CAROLA ESQ JIRE Palm Bench Lal es Blvd est Palm 1each FI __ JOSEPH ACKERMAN JR ESQUIRE Flagler Dr PhilliP.s._Point Wes Test Palm Beach FI __ JACK GOLDBERGE ESQUIRE Austr i Ave_ Suite est Palm Beach MJ RC NURIK ESQUIRE One Broward Blyd Smte ft rdale FL GARY Mi FA.RMER JR ESQUIRE Andrews Ave Sujt 2t 3Y.Lauderdale FL MARTIN EINBERG El?QUIRE Plaza 267suite lk MA iy c:J EXHIBIT IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA Case No JEFFREY EPSTEIN Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant vs SCOTT ROTHSTEIN individually BRADLEY EDWARDS individually Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff I VOLUME I TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS DATE TAKEN TIME PLACE BEFORE Tuesday December 5th a.m p.m Dixie Highway Room l0C West Palm Beach Florida Donald Hafele Presiding Judge This cause came on to be heard at the time and place aforesaid when and where the following proceedings were reported by Sonja Hall Palm Beach Reporting Service Inc Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard Suite West Palm Beach FL Palm Beach Reporting Service Inc C2 CD SCKROLAJ NQ_ Your Honor i:s true con tend Ener:e no J:5a15Te cause initiate Enis proceeding Ener:e was a prpw15Te cause continue 251lel proceed CTITe initiation ITQ continuation Q1 EQe proceed_yig caused amag Bracl.J.:ey Eawarcl 15otn because no piQJ:5a15Te cause ever existed S,o fill was initiated and continued in a15sence Q1 cause MR LINK Your Honor that only makes sense If you think what about Mr Scarola just said if its not probable cause when I filed it and I continue with the lawsuit then there was never probable cause But the continuation isnt I filed it and it should have been eliminated that day The second day after the lawsuit its already been continued THE COURT I will give you two minutes to wrap up We had planned on minutes We are now going on But again I want to give both sides the opportunity MR LINK I appreciate that THE COURT I have read the materials and I have heard the arguments I dont Palm Beach Reporting Service Inc EXHIBIT JEFFREY EP TEIN Plaintiff vs SCOTT ROTHSTEIN individually BRADLEY EDW individual1y and L.M individual1y Defendant I IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT JN AND FOR 267PALM BEACHCOUNTY FLORIDA 267cASE NO SUPPLEMENT TO EDWARDS MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FORLEA VE TO AMEND TO ASSERT CLAIM FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES Deferidarit/Counter-plaintiff BRADLEY EDWARDS hereby supplements his previously filed Motion to Dismiss EpsteinsSecond Amended Complaint and Motion for Leave to Amend to Assert a.Claim for Pm1itiye Damages as fo1lows Absolute immunity must be afforded any m;:t occurring during course of judicial proceecling regardless of whether act involves defarnatory statement or other tortious behavior such as fortious interference with business relationship so long as act has some relationship to proceeding See Levin,Midd/ebrooks Mabie Thomas Mayes Mitchell P.A U.S Fire Ins Co 2d Fla The.immunity afforded to statements made during the course of a judicial.proceeding extends notonJy to the parties in a pr6ceeding but to judges witnesses and counsel as well Id The litigation privilege appHes in all causes of action whether for common law torts or statutory violations See Echevarria McCal/a Raymer Barre Frappierv Cole So 2d Fla Defamatory stateri1ents made by lawyer while interviewing a witness in prepar ation for and connected to pending litigation are covered by the absolute i Case No Suppleme11t to Ed vrirds Mo lion to Dismiss and Motion for Leav lo Amend to Ass.ert Claim for Punitive Damages Page ofJ immunity conferred by the litigation privilege See De/Monico T,ayiwr So 3d Fla Dist Ct App 4tli Dist review granted So 3d Fla The privilege extends to statem nts in judicial proceedings or those necessarily prelin1inary thereto See Stewart Sun Sentinel Co So.2d F1a 4th DCA an attorneys delivery ofa copy of a notice of claim to a repo11er which notice was a required filing prior to instituting suit was protected by absolute.immunity I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and con-ect copy of the foregoing has been furnished by 2A-nr Fax and U.S Mail to all counsel on the a att./tache Jig day fAugust Ja tarol Flo No Se rcy I enney Scarola Barnhart Shipley P.A i aim Beach Lakes Bouleva rd est Palm Beach Florida hone Fax Attorneys for Bradley Edwards Case No Supplement to Ed,vards M.olion to Dismiss and Motion for Leave to Amend to Assert Claim for Pui1itive Damages Page3 of3 Martin Weinberg Esquire Martin Weinberg P.C ParkPla Suite Suffolk MA i6 Phone Fax Jack A Goldberger Esquire Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A COUNSEL LIST Australian Avemte South SuHe West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Le nnan PL Andrews Avenue Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Marc Nurik Esquire Law Offices of Marc Nurik One Broward Blvd Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Joseph Ackerman Jr,i Esquire Fowler White Burnett P.A PhiIIips Point West Flagler Ddve West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax 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 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 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 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
