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 Edwards asks this Court to stay enforcement of its subpoenas for a brief period of time to permit this Court to first rule on the pending motion for summary judgment on all of Epsteins claims that have been filed by Edwards If any of Epsteins claims somehow survive the pending summary judgment motion then this Court could rule on the proper scope of the subpoena and any privilege or other issues which remain to be litigated Edwards proposes a schedule to rapidly bring these issues to resolution and urges the Court to adopt it Edwards also requests a protective order narrowing the scope of the production requests made by Epstein and requiring billionaire Epstein to pay all reasonable costs associated with responding to his discovery requests BACKGROUND FACTS As this court is well aware from a summary judgment motion filed by Edwards Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein a convicted sex offender has sued legal counsel Bradley Edwards Esq for conduct that occurred in the course of Edwards representation of multiple young female victims of Epsteins sexual abuse Edwards filed and pursued civil lawsuits against Epstein to recover damages for Epsteins extensive pattern of molestations In retaliation and to try and intimidate Edwards and his young clients Epstein brought this lawsuit in this court alleging that Edwards had somehow fabricated and/or exaggerated the claims Edwards has now filed a comprehensive motion for summary judgment against Epstein detailing how he is entitled to judgment on each and every one of Epsteins frivolous claims Epstein has yet to file any response to Edwards comprehensive summary judgment motion Nonetheless he continues to harass Edwards through discovery requests connected with this case In particular on April Epstein propounded an extremely broad Request for Production RFP to Edwards See Exhibit A Containing some different requested items the RFP seeks all sorts of electronically stored information including a raft of internal emails between Edwards and other attorneys paralegals expert witnesses investigators and others who worked on the civil lawsuits against Epstein On May Edwards duly responded to the request for production Through his legal counsel Edwards noted that many of the requests sought attorney-client or work-product privileged information and others were overly broad and unduly burdensome See Exhibit While Edwards was raising his objections to the subpoena lodged against him Epstein duplicated his requests by serving a separate subpoena for the same information On April four days after making the requests to Edwards without waiting for his responses to the requests much less a court ruling on Edwards objections Epstein served a subpoena duces tecum for documents on bankruptcy court-appointed trustee Herb Stettin A bit of background may be helpful here Mr Stettin never represented any of the underage females who had been sexually abused by Epstein Instead Mr Stettin has possession of certain records related to this case and many more entirely unrelated to this case because he was court-appointed as bankruptcy trustee for the now-defunct law firm of Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler RRA Edwards had a brief connection to RRA For a short period of time during his representation of his young clients Edwards was employed by RRA It was then revealed that the law firm president Scott Rothstein had been running a criminal Ponzi scheme out of the law firm Shortly after learning of the fraud Edwards left RRA Later RRA declared bankruptcy and the bankruptcy court appointed Herb Stettin trustee of the estate of RRA charging him with handling financial claims regarding the assets of the firm RRA electronic database including all electronically stored files and emails were left in the possession of Stettin Because Stettin was not involved in the sexual abuse litigation against Epstein he does not have detailed lmowledge of the persons or subjects discussed in the various e-mails and other records On June a hearing was set before this court on Epsteins Motion to Compel the Trustee to produce the documents responsive to Epsteins subpoena On that date Stettins counsel Edwards counsel and counsel for Epstein all met in the hallway outside the courtroom and worked out an agreed resolution to the dispute All counsel agreed that Stettin would turn over to Edwardss counsel all documents responsive to the subpoena and that Edwards counsel would then prepare a privilege log and produce all documents that are not subject to objection or privilege At that point Epstein could pursue any further arguments that he wanted in this Court regarding materials not produced As a result of the agreement the Court never held the hearing on the Motion to Compel Epsteins counsel agreed to draft a proposed consent order for all the parties Despite the agreement between the parties Epsteins counsel never prepared that agreed order Instead Epstein decided to launch litigation in yet another forum the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida On July Epstein filed a Motion to Compel production of numerous documents from Trustee Stettin in the bankruptcy proceeding being overseen by the bankruptcy court Judge Raymond Ray See Jeffrey Epsteins Motion to Compel Production of Documents from Trustee Pursuant to Document Production Protocol Established by DE In re Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler Case No DE attached as Exhibit In his motion Epstein recounted that he had served a subpoena on the trustee See id at Epstein did not inform the bankruptcy court however that he was seeking the same information from Edwards and that Edwards had raised claims of privilege Nor did Epstein mention that he had previously filed a motion to compel before this Court Instead Epstein claiined to the banlauptcy court that roduction of these documents from the Trustee is critical to issues in the state court lawsuit Without access to the emails in question Movant will suffer unfair prejudice and will be unable to obtain information critical to bis lawsuit Id at Epstein also stated that he was willing to reimburse the Estate for its reasonable expenses incurred in reviewing the documents for privileged matters and preparing a Privilege Log Id at In response on July Edwards filed a Motion for Protective Order DE Exhibit and an amended Motion for Protective Order DE Exhibit to restrict this production so that privileged or other non-discoverable material was not produced A hearing was held on that Motion and on August the bankruptcy court entered an Order that appointed as Special Master former Broward County Circuit Judge Robert Carney to take all materials responsive to the subpoena from Stettin and to prepare a privilege log DE Exhibit Special Master Camey did take possession of the materials however after reviewing the materials he immediately realized that there were obvious problems if he the Special Master prepared a privilege log Specifically lacking familiarity with the sexual abuse litigation the Special Master had no way to determine which materials were relevant and of those relevant materials which were privileged Moreover the privileges were not the Special Masters to assert or waive Rather the attorney-client privilege and other privileges were held by clients of Edwards and Edwards himself As a result of these problems on September Special Master Camey filed a Motion to Clarify Order Appointing Special Master DE Exhibit On September Edwards then filed another Motion for Protective Order DE attached as Exhibit In that motion Edwards explained that Epstein asks this Banlcruptcy Court to usurp the properly exercised jurisdiction of the Circuit Court over a subpoena duces tecum issued by the state court in connection with an action pending before the state court Id at Edwards further noted that he had previously objected to this information being turned over in state court and that this was Epsteins attempt to backdoor his way into obtaining information to which he is not entitled Id at On October the banlcruptcy court entered an amended order modifying the production procedures and the role of the Special Master DE attached as Exhibit I In this Amended Order Respecting Production of Documents Regarding Jeffrey Epstein the banlcruptcy court directed the Trustee to produce all of the materials in question to Edwards law firm Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman Farmer Jaffe was then directed to produce a privilege log of all materials The privilege log was to be provided to the Special Master The Special Master was in tum to schedule a hearing where all parties in interest will have the opportunity to provide written submissions respecting the privilege log and to make argument on all issues relevant to the applicability of privilege as to the documents listed on the Farmer Jaffe privilege log That hearing shall be transcribed by a court reporter Id at Then following completion of the aforementioned hearing the Special Master shall prepare a report making all appropriate findings and recommendations to the Court which shall be served on all parties in interest and filed with the Court along with the transcript of the Special Masters hearing If an objection to the report is filed by any party in interest then this Court shall schedule and hold a hearing to resolve with finality the issues of privilege as consistent with the appropriate law and procedures set forth herein Id Following the entry of this order Trustees counsel delivered several disks containing more than pages of materials to Farmer Jaffe Some of these materials are e-mails from the RRA computers and other materials are electronically stored case files containing pleadings discovery correspondence between counsel and other case related materials While some of these materials are connected with the Epstein litigation many of them are not Most of the materials do not appear to be responsive to the Epstein subpoena originally served On November Edwards filed a motion in bankruptcy court requesting relief from the Amended Order See Motion for Relief from Amended Order DE and to Compel Jeffrey Epstein to Pay for the Production of all Documents in Response to His Request DE Attached as Exhibit It was then also discovered that the disks provided to Edwards were not identical to those provided to Special Master Carney and a meeting was set up between Special Master Camey and Edwards to compare the disks and get the correct disks in Edwards hands to begin review of the materials As a result on November Special Master Camey met with Edwards The disk problem was sorted out and Edwards was then provided the same materials that Special Master Carney had from which Edwards was ordered pursuant to DE to begin preparing a privilege log During the meeting with Special Master Carney it became apparent that the result of Edwardss creation of a privilege log and his anticipated objections to the production of irrelevant and privileged materials was on a path for a hearing ultimately before the bankruptcy court ruling on the scope of this Courts subpoena and possible restrictions from it DISCUSSION TIDS COURT RATHER THAN THE BANKRUPTCY COURT IS THE PROPER FORUM FOR LITIGATING THE SCOPE OF SUBPOENAS SERVED IN TIDS CASE As is apparent from the foregoing recitation of the facts Epstein has taken his meritless retaliatory lawsuit against Edwards into a different court the bankruptcy court and then sought to have rulings on the application of privileges in this Courts case made by that court This backdoor approach is not proper as the issues surrounding this Courts subpoenas belong before this Court for several reasons First and foremost Epstein is now deploying his retaliatory lawsuit to burden Edwards and other lawyers at his firm with requests to review tens of thousands of pages of documents for privilege claims and other discovery issues Because the Trustee has produced what amounts to every single piece of paper that even remotely relates to an Epstein case rather than just those documents responsive to the subpoena Edwards is now forced to review more than documents to create a privilege log While it might be appropriate to force the attorneys to review some portion of those documents if a viable lawsuit were at hand Epsteins lawsuit is entirely meritless As explained at length in Edwards pending motion for summary judgment Epsteins case should be summarily rejected for three separate reasons First under the well-established sword and shield doctrine Epstein cannot assert a Fifth Amendment privilege to deny access to relevant discovery about his lawsuit while simultaneous trying to force Edwards to pay damages Second because Epstein has repeatedly taken the Fifth when asked numerous relevant questions about his lawsuit no reasonable jury could find in his favor And third and most fundamentally Epsteins lawsuit completely lacks any factual basis whatsoever and does not even make an attempt at alleging a viable damage theory If the Court were to agree with Edwards and grant his summary judgment motion on any of these three separate grounds then it seems likely that the entire discovery dispute surrounding Epsteins subpoenas to Edwards and the trustee would be considerably narrowed or perhaps even eliminated entirely It makes no sense that extensive satellite litigation is on-going in the bankruptcy court about subpoenas in Epsteins case when Epsteins case itself is meritless and malicious Of course the bankruptcy court has to assume that Epsteins case has merit as it is bound to recognize a presumptively valid subpoena that Epstein has issued through this Court Only this Court can rule on the lack of merit to Epsteins case and then narrow or eliminate this separate litigation about the subpoenas Second even assuming arguendo that Epsteins case could survive the pending summary judgment motion the bankruptcy court is simply not the proper forum for determining privilege claims in this case Without in any way challenging the legal acumen of the bankruptcy court the ultimate issues of privilege in this case must be decided by this Court Whatever the bankruptcy court may conclude about certain privilege arguments in the context of discovery this Court will have to ultimately rule on those privilege claims at trial It makes no sense to have two different judges taking time to rule on the same issues Rather one court should make one binding ruling one time on the privilege issues The only court that can issue a final ruling Even if the Court grants summary judgment for Edwards this case will continue before this Court on Edwards counterclaim against Epstein controlling at trial is this Court Therefore this Court should rule on the discovery issues as well Third only this Court can fairly evaluate Edwards claims regarding the scope of the subpoenas Epstein has issued through this Court extremely broad subpoenas which are unduly burdensome on Edwards and his law firm Yet the bankruptcy court does not have authority to grant relief from those subpoenas only this Court can do that Under rule of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure the trial judge may limit or prohibit discovery to protect a party or person from annoyance embarrassment oppression or undue burden or expense As explained in Rasmussen South Florida Blood Service Inc So.2d Fla under this rule trial judges possess broad discretion to restrict discovery But that discretion rests in the trial court id which obviously is familiar with the litigation pending before it The bankruptcy court cannot exercise discretion to restrict this Courts subpoenas Finally the bankruptcy court simply lacks jurisdiction to rule regarding privilege issues that have arisen in this Courts case It is well settled that the bankruptcy courts jurisdiction is limited to I cases under title core bankruptcy proceedings that either arise under the Bankruptcy Code or arise in a case under the Code or cases in which all interested parties consent to the bankruptcy court having jurisdiction to enter a final order in a matter that is related to a case under the Bankruptcy Code In re Ray F.3d WL th Cir internal quotations omitted Ruling on privilege claims from a subpoena issued by this Court in a tort suit filed by Epstein who is not a party to the bankruptcy proceeding against Edwards who is likewise not a party to the bankruptcy proceeding does not fall within any of these grants of jurisdiction to the bankruptcy court and therefore Epsteins proposed procedure is without jurisdictional foundation TIDS COURT SHOULD ENTER A PROTECTIVE ORDER AND ESTABLISH A SCHEDULE FOR RESOLVING THE PENDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND THEN ANY SURVIVING PRIVILEGE ISSUES While Edwards could file a jurisdictional objection to the bankruptcy court ruling on this issue he does not want to spawn further litigation that could delay a resolution of the privilege issues Instead Edwards proposes that this Court simply assert jurisdiction over its subpoena and the litigation that has arisen from it The subpoena to Edwards and to the trustee that Epstein has propounded were issued on the authority of this Court Accordingly it is indisputable that this Court can simply withdraw or stay enforcement of its subpoena thereby simply consolidating the litigation surrounding its subpoena into this Court This Court could then make binding rulings on both the merits or lack thereof of Epsteins lawsuit and any surviving privilege issues concerning the subpoenas Edwards therefore respectfully proposes that the Court take the following actions Hold its scheduled hearing on Edwards summary motion on January The Court shall then rule on whether any of Epsteins claims survive Edwards summary judgment motion After making those rulings the Court should then rule on whether Epsteins subpoenas should be quashed in light of its rulings If the Court concludes that parts of the subpoenas remain viable then the Court could rule on any remaining claims of privilege or other objections that have not been mooted by its summary judgment rulings Stay further enforcement of its subpoenas to the trustee and to Edwards pending further rulings by this Court on the merits of Epsteins underlying lawsuit and any privilege or other issues that Edwards might raise to the subpoenas Direct Edwards to prepare a privilege log regarding documents that are actually responsive to the subpoenas Such privilege log shall be prepared within days following this Courts ruling on Edwards pending summary judgment motion assuming any claim by Epstein survives At that time Edwards shall also produce to Epstein any documents that are responsive to the subpoenas to Edwards and to the trustee and for which there is no privilege or other objection to production i.e vagueness in the subpoena or not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence Epstein shall then file any objections to claim of privilege or other objections within days following Edwards response Edwards shall file any response to Epstein within days following receipt of the objections In addition it is clear that there is an imbalance of financial resources between billionaire Jeffrey Epstein and the parties on whom he is serving subpoenas This Court possesses the authority to direct the requesting party to pay the costs and expenses of providing discovery PHILIP PADOVANO FLORIDA CIVIL PRACTICE at edition citing CBS Inc Jackson So.2d Fla Mt Sinai Med Ctr Inc Perez-Torbay So.2d Fla 3d DCA Given the vast sums available to Epstein to pursue his meritless litigation he should be directed to pay to Farmer Jaffe and Stettin all costs associated with responding to his discovery requests including reasonable costs of attorneys time and any copying or other expenses Because proceedings are on-going in the banlauptcy court regarding these issues Edwards is simultaneously giving notice to the bankruptcy court the trustee and the Special Master that this pleading is being filed and providing a copy of this pleading to each of them CONCLUSION This Court should stay further enforcement of its subpoena to Edwards and to the trustee Stettin pending further ruling on the pending summary judgment motion regarding Epsteins lawsuit This Court should also enter a protective order narrowing the scope of Epsteins requests and requiring Epstein to pay all reasonable expenses associated with responding to his requests This Court should then grant Edwards pending summary judgment motion against Epstein and then rule on any surviving privilege or other issues concerning Epsteins subpoenas I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by qi Fax and U.S Mail to all Counsel on the attached list day ofNove ar No ea Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard est Palm Beach Florida Phone Fax Attorney for Bradley Edwards COUNSEL LIST Jack A Goldberger Esquire Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A Australian Avenue South Suite West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman 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 Esquire Fowler White Burnett P.A Phillips Point West Flagler Drive West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax The Honorable Herbert Stettin Trustee One Biscayne Tower Suite Two South Biscayne Boulevard Miami Florida Robert Camey Special Master Saratoga Lane West Palm Beach FL
