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 y!k N?M??N rC f?Nla3 Yz d6h N?M 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 CASE NO It also appears on another occasion Mr Rothstein showed boxes of the case files against Jeffrey Epstein to a lawyer named Michael Legamaro who was representing investors in the alleged Ponzi scheme The Plaintiff has alleged and claims that the Defendants and perhaps other former employees of RRA conspired to use the Epstein/LM litigation and claims by other alleged victims to lure investors into making approximately worth of investments into alleged settlements with Mr Epstein The Plaintiff contends that as a result of the efforts of Rothstein to market his investment scheme steps were taken by Mr Edwards and other members of his firm to utilize the pending cases against Mr Epstein to advance the interest of the Ponzi scheme by taking actions outside the scope of what was reasonably necessary to prosecute the claims against Mr Epstein i.e an abuse of process Edwards denies being a participant in any Ponzi scheme civil theft or criminal enterprise Moreover Mr Edwards claims that the real purpose of this lawsuit was to pressure Edwards and one of his clients LM in pending ligation Edwards has claimed damage to his reputation professional relationship and damages from this action Rothstein has not filed an answer II LEGAL THEORIES Epstein has plead claims for damages based on Floridas Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act against all Defendants claims for damages based on Florida Rico Act against all Defendants claims for damages for abuse of process against all Defendants Edwards has denied the allegations of Epsteins claim for damages and has further asserted a counterclaim for damages for injury to his reputation interference with his professional relationship loss of value of his time and the cost of defending this action FOWLER WHITE CASE NO I LIKELIHOOD OF CASE NO Plaintiff to get approval from the special master before they are used in any deposition or court proceeding As can be seen by the recommendation of the special master it is anticipated that once the preliminary in-camera review is concluded and obvious non-privilege matters are removed from consideration it will be necessary to schedule evidentiary hearings on whether any of the claimed privilege documents still remain privileged or the privilege has been waived or subject to an exception It is anticipated that those hearings will be briefed in advance of their scheduling It is more likely that they will not be scheduled before May Counsel for the investors who placed money into the Ponzi scheme Conrad Scherer served a subpoena that was substantially the same as Epsteins on the trustee It was initially intended that they be part of the special master proceeding and it is anticipated that they will They have filed a Motion before Judge Ray set for April Counsel for some of the alleged victim Plaintiffs in the underlying lawsuits against Mr Epstein has also filed a limited notice of appearance and a motion for protective order relating to documents disclosed on the privilege log that are claimed to be protected by a joint-defense privilege It is anticipated that this counsel Spencer Kuvin will be participating in the special master proceedings Jurisdiction Issues Between the Bankruptcy Court and the Circuit Court Since the records of former RRA are property of the bankruptcy trustee the jurisdiction relating to the use of those records falls within the jurisdiction of the FOWLER WHITE CASE NO bankruptcy court Since the subpoenas on this case emanate from the Circuit Court issues relating to the subpoena and the ultimate admissibility of the documents produced by the trustee belong within the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court The problem that arises is that a party in the bankruptcy proceeding seeks the same records as Mr Epstein It was the intention of the bankruptcy court to have a special master resolve those issues as to both parties The remaining issue will be which court the Bankruptcy Court or the Circuit Court will rule on the recommendations or any objections to the recommendations of the special master The Plaintiff believes that only one court should make that determination because if it were split among the courts with the state court ruling on the recommendations as to the state case and the bankruptcy court ruling on the same recommendations as it relates to the bankruptcy case then there is the possibility for conflicting decisions as to whether a privilege exists or not thus opening the door in one court for a party in another court to use what may have been determined to be privileged records This is a matter without an easy resolution and it still needs to be resolved Additional Pending Records Request From the Trustee The Bankruptcy Courts initial order granting Epsteins Motion to Compel also required the production of records from RRAs server and from Q-Task Judge Ray has entered an order of contempt assessed fines and fees against Q-Task for failure to follow orders of the bankruptcy court It appears that the next step for Q-Task if they fail to comply will be subject to arrest and incarceration It is not certain when they will produce the requested records but it FOWLER WHITE CASE NO is anticipated within the next three months Q-Task has appealed but Judge Rays order has not been stayed It is anticipated that the RRA server records will be made available within the next two months however it is likely they will also be subject to privilege claims the preparation of a privilege log an in-camera hearing as with the earlier documents Contacts With Law Enforcement Records The Plaintiff also subpoenaed records by and between RRA and certain law enforcement agencies during the prosecution of these civil claims The trustee is prepared to produce those records and does not believe any privileges exist However there is a Motion for Protective Order claiming privileges even though these law enforcement agencies are third parties which is scheduled before this court for April The Defendant seeks a Motion for Protection claiming the records are privileged and seeking the appointment of Robert Carney to be a special master so that a privilege log and in-camera inspection of these records may occur If the court determines that a log and in-camera inspection is required then the Plaintiff anticipates that based on past experience with the Defendant in preparing proper privilege logs it could be several months before the log is actually prepared and in a form for an in-camera review and hearing on the claim for privileges Other Motions Scheduled March Edwards Motion to Add Claim for Punitive Damages FOWLER WHITE CASE NO March Edwards Motion to Reconsider Judge Crows Ruling Denying Discovery Until Alleged Sexual Conduct If this Motion is granted it will substantially expand the discovery and issues relating to the case making it highly unlikely that this case will be ready for trial for at least another year April April April April Epsteins Motion to Compel Edwards to Answer Questions at His Deposition and to Compel a Further Deposition Epsteins Motion to Compel Discovery From Edwards and Whether the Privilege Claims Are Waived Preliminary In-Camera Review by the Special Master Judge Carney Edwards Motion for Protective Order Regarding Subpoena for Law Enforcement Contacts With RRA VI DISCOVERY DEPOSITIONS A Presently two depositions of investors have occurred It is anticipated that at least three more will occur Part of the delay is getting records that Edwards claims are privileged It is difficult to determine how many more individuals will need to be disposed and a more likely estimate of that will occur after at least the initial rulings on the in camera review take place However it is anticipated that at least three or four members of the former RRA firm will be deposed FOWLER WHITE CASE NO Amendment to Pleadings The Plaintiff will amend his pleadings once the discovery of the RRA records is substantially concluded Epstein has amended his pleadings to take out any possible argument that the issues of whether the Plaintiff actually was involved with these assaults is part ofthis case VIL THE PLAINTIFFS PROPOSED TIME LIMITS A To join other parties and amend pleadings days after their production of the records from RRA that were subject of the first two Epstein subpoenas investor contacts and law Enforcement contacts and the production of the RRA server and Q-Task documents To identify any non-parties days after the production of the records from RRA by the bankruptcy trustee/special master To file and hear motions days after the production of the records from RRA by the bankruptcy trustee/special master To disclose expert witnesses days after the production of records from RRA by the bankruptcy trustee/special master Scheduling of trial Plaintiff request this not be considered until subsequent status conference after production of the records sought from the bankruptcy trustee has taken place Names of Attorneys Responsible for Handling the Action Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein Joseph Ackerman Jr Esq Christopher Knight Esquire Defendant Bradley Edwards Jack Scarola Esq FOWLER WHITE Defendant Scott Rothstein Marc Nurik Esq CASE NO Necessity for a Protective Order to Facilitate Discovery Numerous Motions for Protective Order that have been filed by the Defendant Edwards has caused an unwarranted delay in this proceeding It is likely that future protective orders will be filed by the Plaintiff particularly if issues of sexual conduct becomes a part of this case At the present time the Plaintiff is not aware of any protective order that can be entered to facilitate discovery Plaintiffs Proposal for the Formulation and Simplification of Issues/Timing of Motions for Summary Judgment and Partial Summary Judgment Once this matter is set for trial the deadline for Motions for Partial Summary Judgment or Summary Judgment would be days prior to discovery cut off Further the Plaintiff submits that future Motions for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment should not be heard until the records from the bankruptcy trustee have been provided and are available for use in discovery and for deposition I Possibility of Obtaining Admissions of Fact/Exchange of Documents and Stipulations Regarding Authenticity At this point it is difficult to say what the likelihood would be for obtaining admissions of fact and voluntarily exchange of documents and other evidence To date very little of this has been able to be accomplished Suggestions on Advisability and Timing of Magistrate Special Master Mediation FOWLER WHITE CASE NO A special master has already been appointed by the bankruptcy court The issue which needs to be resolved is which court will rule on the special masters recommendations and/or objections to his report without creating inconsistent rulings It is unlikely that mediation will be effective until the case is ready to be set for trial Counsel for Edwards has previously stated that they have no interest in mediation Preliminary Estimate of Time Required for Trial Plaintiff estimates that it will take trial days for the entire case Description of Documents and List of Fact Witnesses The parties have already pursuant to an earlier court order submitted a list of documents and fact witnesses Those exhibits and witness lists are incorporated herein by reference VI NUMBER OF EXPERTS AND FIELD OF EXPERTISE Unknown at this time for the Plaintiff Defendant Edwards has previously stated that he anticipates calling two attorneys familiar with the standard of care and legal ethics as well two attorneys on fees/damages If the court allows the Defendants damage claims to remain it is anticipated that the Plaintiff will call the same number of rebuttal experts in the same fields IX OTHER HELPFUL INFORMATION None at this time FOWLER WHITE CASE NO I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed this day of March to Jack Alan Goldberger Esq Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A Australian Avenue South Suite West Palm Beach FL Marc Nurik Esq Law Offices of Marc Nurik One East Broward Boulevard Suite Fort Lauderdale FL and Jack Scarola Esquire Searcy Denney Scarola et al Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard P.O Drawer West Palm Beach FL CASMAN97-Epsteins Case Management Report-JLA.docx Respectfully submitted Fla Bar No Christopher Knight Florida Bar FOWLER WIITTE Case Doc Filed Page of i1 i:t FO.R.rL JJD RD BIMISJON JNREt fllSz-EINROS EJJlT hE _ebtcir cA;SE,NlUW-04V9..I,;;,Ji!J Q.:i BR Dl W,TEmtlJ NOWJ lk POR COM.ES NOW-!-c un.s,e:l fodeffl.ey E.pstein at the 242,stofie peci11t?vl8 ter;:Hon RQ ifC..iihi YdtivC,:s nqt;i f."tfi J.TI.it11f of tlie hiteruni"Report of the Special Mastet Respectfully:subnutted l:i i itol mteenlli Floor 1vrurmt ri elephqpe W9 Eac;s.imjle PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT ff I I I I I I Case Doc Filed Page of ehtor RobertB 251arney,_y.our rt.cthe PQIPQ pf tll ReP9.i,:.tis-tq,l,c p:tP.e ciUJ1,a,4 ii eg gardi!fg rogtess:made,so farandto.-makesome CQm,meng ff:o fO.r fut liC,UOri 267equited the Defert-dantsct fproduce:a;:Priwl LQg,by Jfuium;y31,-20tJ Wliile a,Privilege LogWas pres;eqtea tm;tely Plafutiffoijj tha.t ifwas"notin comlfliahce with fiIGJm Corp v.Johnsoni Fla 4tll;DCA 20IH fhe;Paities nie wi yqurSp cial ter on gOJJ a 242to-ani nient for,production,.of a more iJG.-complfa,nt Prhdle e,Log.t.his sec,omI log waspn:iduced _and tlie-Plaintiff gafu 267ol?jected to:its arm Ag the parties anct the pecial Master-met this itim on t-1his secprid meetiIJ,g,-tlk Plailitiffrequested that t1ie Si tc:ftee"olJ,lID.d sanctions-to and in.eluding a:detertnrnation of awmver._af pri vflege As oflliis jrlterim teporii rather extensive li fdfd,o 265rne 265tji has be ea ftom flpproximateiy 267twent eight thousand pages to 225-approxima sixt hunat.ed PQr 242nfr.ie.s SQ e,o_f wfi ve,itiQ tlj,w j_le P!iC de,t 265llents other the sooeen,hundred haye:b.e_en released4o the Plailitf,s 265bjecl to CQnfi;d_ ntialicy:,provisipn.s Toe remaimng documents are emails many of which have multiple 242nts AA incl striligs of9ilief emails Your Specfal faste.f that tlie 225natotesof thedocimiertts make very difficult fue"ptoduction,of aJhivlieiet,Qg for which there caririot oe an ooJection-riilsed Contintiing,wjffiproduction and pbj ou fu your Speeial Master;s v1ew gofug-toJ e-counterpr.oducth e-b fhnt-fu:ne d:efficlency A.ft t-4g;:c,us:Siori of tlris_ wrtn the Speci Mast has directed the follqw,fug:l fenciimt wilUpi:oduce 267t9:Piamtiff:a mastef list afthenru:nes 267contamed i tlfo Case Doc Filed Page of SEifl0?09-34is1iei e.RBR rtV:ilege log describing whos,they are and to-be:include_d on ffiis list 267will be 267names and cap_a i ofiJi4iYf4mil iveq p1eiH rbl Tfi:Prtr4 i b.idl:lr.eilorie llJit later tl an ZQ.l_l r.w will provid the P.laintilt th a ett abUify to cle4lr;rnl1;1 ifthe is tlui-d party cfasclosure On A.pril the parties Will be p.res_e!lt whileso p.e.cia1Master.,c.onducts-an fn,cdme,_ra inspection ofthedocumertts The 267puqitise,of-the in-,ciimenamspection is,to cull the do 267cuments furthet!and provide Plaintiff mtlLftuilier ilifonnatiori,t 267gatding the cifics qf tlie iss rt Following this incamerafospec:tion the parties will scliedule aaev.identiary liearing fqr fmal tjliiti ij.o_ft:Iie,priyil ge 267fssue with:the"-R 242poit oft!J:e Spe.ctaj e_r to,foliow slj;ql 1y tlieremtei A di,tional"Reco en atto This matter came _efote this couit Because t,hj gugh th tf.ust 11aa Mr Epstein sou tiitliis stat courf!action;,J,udge Crow the-stat 242iitt.jud,ge has fe.h to th procedureidn pl i:fuftheJi pt ycOu,rtwrule at the,same time noJmg;;_that;he iSh"O:t.6.ound";by the 267,decisions of thecbankrupfoy 267court as it ps tQ.w:tate RC!Yce,q aj vide ai;r-rl!iW thlirl ave_s gpen tlj:y.potc,ntial 267for-corifljcri.ngl Urt oi4.eJ;S yffifo,oQters before t1ie 225thesedocuments tcro not part r0 tlie state tiif action and Mr Epstein 267ilOt party to f:itiy banlcfliptQy cow;t action Nota:rdhey ihvolved many he:arings,befote-,your,Special Master Mt Epstefu figlits de1Ne soJ lY as a:resultciflils state-court 242tioh and qge ow:i cott that h.e indeed the-presiding Judge 267:for,proced11.al an evid mtfary niatters iJ that action rec9rp;m.:eIJ qo as 0Jlows 267tne:pllt,tie approacp::JudgeJ:rowfeg rdfug a 1xfintingji:cii,ir-Special Master aia Special Master aiso in the.state,,court actitm If iidseocrbw agr tq 247ich appointment and if:thiic9iitt,agre 242s,,.tlien port-ofthe,S echtl Master:wotlld,,oeprovided to ooth theibankruptcyjudge and;the state cQu:rtjU i.g ci bjecti!Jn w.lill.:e,pr ent tp 5fui tJld be ee to J:ugge C::A If 225Recommendatfons 267offhe,-Spe:cii aEMaste.rlt,wout,tcome_frQm Judge,:Ctow Likewise if any objections are.:sustained that:,orderl too would come front Ju ige i i I I I Case Doc Filed Page of cA By taldng c:ihis approach cthe po ntial of 225co.oflicting Qters lim.b 265tted llifpl fu:eiiuitio id.fant tQ epJ red PY Ju4ge:fJrow;regi m,g ocumentsinffie;possessfon OftheJ,rust 267wqlJia1Jeifuy orde.r ithl omt wlAf hl ve thi uit prop.erlyin"cciontrol of qo iC tsin it pos ssion Ar:the.same 267tin1e;iliis:pre oure-:telie:ves:this,courl 1fhavingto i c;,ly ate iWide 2611Jiary:is ues for wlii tbis urj has re If both Judge Crow"and,JudgecRay;-are;J 256_enapleJo this pr-0cedw,,e thenteach 267co.uif:S rs:sl:tpwd 6e.etitereti eir4ed c.gt 1:.iling!r the piutieshave agJ ff:that ud 267Crow needs tooe;lVQl:ved in thls piQcess As fii"no ed in Feb 1th ii r-to y.o Special MameriWe do not-object to 1ud Crow b.fiiltg presenteJfwitli r9.ur report arid riiling,on any oj tioris,Jo it,,piQvid I Jw.fge Ray:agtees/tikew:ire the Defendantl1as peatedly:requested thatJudge:Ctowbethe ne.tn nue qn any bj 242ctio_ or lJ eone to a iqptilie R:eco 242ertd"1ti ns ofth speclai Master Your Sp t.er nmk this hi,s reCO.tllQlf:Jl t,i,:m s4.i of-yet the parties ifthi sC.Qurti amenabl f4.atsugg OF ff:tJ 265s,re.po lio11c4 es not,itselfprovideAli:at nudge then perhaps fuj cow.t i
