JEFFREY EPSTEIN Plaintiff vs SCOTT ROTHSTEIN individually BRADLEY EDWARDS individually and L.M individually Defendant I Electronically Filed PM 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 d6h N?M 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 Edwards adv Epstein Case No Motion to Ovenule All Claims of Privilege Other than Claims ofFifth Amendment Privilege and to Impose Sanctions satisfied to rely upon his ability to comment on EPSTEINS Fifth Amendment privilege assertions and to rely upon the ability to draw adverse inferences from such asse1iions in the context of civil litigation however such reliance might be precluded if other valid objections existed with regard to the information being sought Pursuant to Exhibit A all of EPSTEINS untimely objections were ovem1led except as to objections based on privilege and EPSTEIN was ordered to prepare and submit a proper privilege log for the obvious purpose of permitting the validity of his privilege objections to be tested Rather than complying with this Courts Order on the day on which the log was to be filed EPSTEIN reasserted his same privilege objections this time accompanied by extensive legal argument as to why no privilege log should be filed see Exhibit EPSTEIN has purposely refused to abide by the Order of this Court and has instead attempted to re-argue his effo1is to evade his discovery obligation Even if addressed on the merits the arguments presented by EPSTEIN provide no reasonable basis for failing to submit the information required to test the validity of his bare assertions of privilege WHEREFORE EDWARDS moves to overrule all of EPSTEINS claims of privilege other than claims based on EPSTEINS protection under the Fifth Amendment against self incrimination and to impose sanctions against EPSTEIN for his past non-compliance with this Courts Order of March including an award of attorneys fees and such other relief as the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances described Edwards adv Epstein Case No Motion to Overrule All Claims of Privilege Other than Claims of Fifth Amendment Privilege and to Impose Sanctions I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via E-Serve to all Counsel on the attached list this Jack ola a Bar No ary E-mail jsx searcylaw.com ndary E-mail mep searcylaw.com Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhrui Shipley P.A Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach Florida Phone Fax Attorneys for BRADLEY EDWARDS Edwards adv Epstein Case No Motion to Overrule All Claims of Privilege Other than Claims of Fifth Amendment Privilege and to Impose Sanctions COUNSEL LIST Jack A Goldberger Esquire goldberger agwpa.com smahoney agwpa.com Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A Australian A venue South Suite West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Bradley Edwards Esquire staff.efile pathtojustice.com Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman FL North Andrews Avenue Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Fred Haddad Esquire Dee FredHaddadLaw.com haddadfrn aol.com Fred Haddad P.A One Financial Plaza Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Marc Nurik Esquire marc nuriklaw.com Law Offices of Marc Nurik One Broward Blvd Suite mi Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Scott Rothstein Tonja Haddad Coleman Esquire tonja tonjahaddad.com Debbie Tonjahaddad.com Tonja Haddad P.A SE 7th Street Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO JEFFREY EPSTEIN Plaintiff vs SCOTT ROTHSTEIN etc et al Defendants ORDER ON COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO STRIKE UNTIMELY OBJECTIONS TO FINANCIAL DISCOVERY THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Counter-Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Untimely Objections to Financial Discovery The Court heard argument of counsel reviewed the court file has reviewed the authorities counsel has cited has reviewed the discovery along with the objections filed on behalf of the Counter-Defendant Based upon the foregoing and after a thorough review of same it is CONSIDERED ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows The Counter-Defendants Objections to Discovery other than privilege including but not limited to constitutional guarantees under the VI and XIV Amendments attorney client privilege work product privilege privacy privilege under the Florida Constitution or any other applicable privilege are overruled However as to any privileges other than a privilege against self-incrimination as guaranteed by the VI and XIV Amendments of the United States Constitution the Counter-Defendant shall file a detailed privilege log outlining the documents and the applicable privilege The Counter-Defendant shall not be required to list any documents he contends are fxfiihrrX Epstein Rothstein et al CaseNo.502009CA040800XMBAG Order Page2 privileged pursuant to the VI and XIV Amendments The privilege log as well as more complete responses shall be filed within fifteen days of the date of this Order tffn DONE AND ORDERED this of Marc at West Palm Beach Palm Beach County Florida Copy furnished See attached list DAVID CIRCUI Edwards adv Epstein Case No Order on Motion to Strike Untimely Objections to Financial Discovery COUNSEL LIST Jack A Goldberger Esquire jgoldberger agwpa.com smahoney agwpa.com Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A Australian A venue South Suite West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Bradley Edwards Esquire staff.efile pathtojustice.com Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman,FL North Andrews Avenue Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Fred Haddad Esquire Dee FredHaddadLaw.com haddadfm aol.com Fred Haddad P.A One Financial Plaza Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Marc Nurik Esquire marc nuriklaw.com Law Offices of Marc Nurik One Broward Blvd Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Scott Rothstein Lilly Ann Sanchez Esquire lsanchez thelsfirm.com The L-S Law Firm Brickell Avenue 15th Floor Miami FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Tonja Haddad Coleman Esquire tonja tonjahaddad.com Debbie Tonjahaddad.com Tonja Haddad P.A SE 7th Street Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Jack Scarola Esquire jsx a searcylaw.com mep searcyl aw.com Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Attorneys for Bradley Edwards IEFFRFY EPSTEIN IN Tl IE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEI:NTI-I JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LM 13EJ CII COl!NTY FLORIDA PlainlilT VS SCOTT ROTHSTEIN individually and 13RADLEY I ED VARDS individually CASE NO BAG Dckndanls PLAINTIFF/C0liNTER-Dl FENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEINS PRIVILGE LO Pl _liJiANJTO fJ lJRT ORDEB.J2i1TEJ MAHCJI Jc!frey Epstein by and through his undersigned counsel and pursuant lo Rule or the Florida Rules Cili Procedure and this Court Order dated March I hereby files his privilege log in response lo Dclcndanl Bradley Ed wan.ls Financial Net Worlh Interrogatories hereinaller 267Jnlcrrngatnries and Request for Production Punitive Damages hereinafter Request for Production I INTERROGATORIES A Constitutional Privileges the YI and XIV Amendments Epstein asserted Constitutional Privileges to Interrogatories Nos through I and including all subparts spccirically staling This Interrogatory requires the provision of detailed linancial information which communicates statements of focl Fisher United 260Jutes U.S I have a substantial and reasonable basis for concern that these statements or fact that are testimonial in nalurc could reasonably furnish a 225link in the chain of evidence that could be used to prosecute me in criminal proceedings See Ht Jinan United States U.S I cannot provide tll1S vers/responscs to questions relating to mv financial hislorv and condition without waivim my Fifth Sixth and Fnurlccn1h Amendment rights as guaranteed by the United Stales Constitution au kffili:fl In this Cour1 larch Order on Jw,mls"s Motion to Strike Epstein response-s to linancial net worth discovery as untimely this Court recognized and refused to find waiver uf Epsteins right to assert his Constitutional Privileges under the United States Constitution Indeed Epstein has both demonstrated and articulated a 267substantial and reasonable basis for concern that the requested infrmnation could 267form a link in the chain or evidence that could be used to prosecute him in criminal proceedings Specifically should Edwards be successful in his ardent quest to invalidate the Non Prosecution Agreement entered into between Epstein and the United States Epstein could foce the prospect of future prosecution Therefore Epstein will continue to assert his right to the Constitutional Privileges See Piscolli Stephens So 2d I Fla 4th DCA Urha11t Urhw1ek SO So 3d Fla 4th DCA I privilege log must be filed for the purpose of determining the validity of the party claim of privilege in the requested information FIA R.C1v However this rule limits the information to be included in the privilege log to that information that is otherwise discoverable Id Here this Court"s Order or March I is clear the information sought by Ed,vards is not otherwise discoverable as it is protected by Epstein FiHh Amendment Privilege Since the determination 1s already been made by this Court that the information requested in the afore-referenced Interrogatories is protected by Epstein Filth Amendment Privilege the need ror the privilege lug is obviated See Jonke rs Sec Ins Co mons So 2d Fla 5th DC Finally as explained more fully below because Epstein has asserted his Constitutional Privileges to each and every lnterrogatory in which he also asserted additional statutory privileges he cannot prepare a traditional privilege log without waiving his Constitutional Privileges Id To hold otherwise would eviscerate the very protections afforded by the Constitution Attorney-Client lri ilege Epstein asserted the allorncy-client privilege to lnterrni.wtorics Nos and ny communication lo which the attorney-client privilege attaches is 267absolutely immune from disclosure United Serlices Ass Roth So 2d Fla 4th DC In this case Edwards has brought forth multiple and protracted litigations spanning the years for which the information is requested As a result or this in addition to the ever-present and ongoing threat or criminal prosecution Epstein has engaged in repeated communications with multiple counsels regarding tile information requesLed in these Interrogatories Since the attorney-client privilc is a privilege tllat cannot be overcome a document by document privilege log is not necessary and a categorical assertion surticcs Nevin Palm Beach County 5,"dwol Bd So 2d I Fla I st DCA Cr11z-Govi11 Torres So 3d Fla 3d DCA Because petitioners objection is 267category and not 267Jocument specific they were not required lo file a privilege log Furthermore the mere production of the information required lo be included in the privilege log Vould constitute communicative testimony itself that is protected from discovery Pisrnlli Stephens So 2d Fla 4th DC In such instances where the creation of a pri ilcge log results in the disclosure of the privileged information as here the courts lave permitted and fashioned alternatives to the traditional privilege log 5,ee e.g Nevin Palm Beach Conmy choo Boord So.2d ltl08 Fla 1st IX Signil1cantly the rnurls ha alsn pcrmitlcd less dctailcd disclnsure where the traditional disclosure would reveal the very information Slntght tu be protected Thrasher WL at S.D.N.Y i for Since a traditional pri 267ilcge log would require Epstein lo disclose the Yery information he seeks lo prulLCl ls pri ilcgcd information a calegllrical claim or pri 267ilcgc as asserted hy Lpslein should suriice See U.S Uericare Medical Supp inc WL I at S.D Ala Dec I Work Protlucl Privilege Fpstein asserted the work product privilege to lntcrrouatorics Nos I and ivlatcrials prepared in anticipation of litigation me not sul jcct to discovery F1A R.Clv I llcre the parties have been engaged in protracted litigation spanning not only many years but also several different causes of action during which time Edwards has sought the discovery of Epstein"s net worth and corresponding linancial information As a result or this in addition to the ever-present and ongoing threat of criminal prosecution due to Edwardss active litigation in which he seeks to overturn Epstein"s Non-Prosecution Agreement Epstein has engaged in protracted preparations in anticipation of litigation Therefore all of the requested information is protected from discovery under the work product privilege The only mitigating factor to compel discovery or work product is showing that the party seeking discovery 267has need of the materials in the prcpnration of the case Federnl Exp Corp Ca11/llay So 2d I I Fla DCA Edv,;ards has not and is not able to do this Since work product privilege cannot be overcome a categorical assertion suffices Nevin Pa/1 Beuch Co1y School Bd So 2d r-Ia st DCA Cruz-Govin Torn So 3d Fla 3d DCA Because petitioners ol jection is category and not 267document specific they were not required to file a privilege log Furthermore the mere production of the information required be included the privilege log would constitute communicative testimony itself that is protected from discovery i Pisco/Ii itephens So 2d Fla 4th DCA In such instances Yhcre the crL 267ation of a privilege log results in the disclosure of the privileged information as here the courts have pcrmi11ed nnd foshioned alternatives to the traditional privilege lng li e.g Neri11 Pull Beud1 School Boord So.2d I I Fla st DCA Significantly the courts have also permilled less detailed disclosure where the traditional disclosure would reveal the very information sought to be protected E.C Thrasher VL at I S.D.N.Y Mar Since a traditi al privilege log would require Epstein to disclose the very information he seeks to protect as privikgt information a calcgoricnl claim or privilege as asserted by Epstein should suffice See U.S Gericore Medirn Supply Inc WL at S.D la Dec Accountant-Client Privilege Epstein asserted the accounlant-clienl Privilege to Interrogatories Nos I and In Florida by statute communications bet,veen an accountant and its client arc privileged when those communications are made in the connection with the accounting services provided to the client FIA STAT As in all conlidential md privileged communications 267the justification for the privilege lies not in the foci or co1munication but in the interest or the persons concerned that the subject mailer slrnuld not become public Sm So 2d Fla quoting Judge Learned land speaking in Uni1ed 1a1es K.ru!c11 F.2d 2d Cir For the period of the requested I nterrogatorics Epstein has engaged in repeated communications with multiple accountants Epstein has vigorously shielded this information from disclosure to third parties As such since disclosure of even the rudimentary infornrntion required in the privilege log is enough to vaive the privilege Epstein asserts this privilege categorically Nevin Palm Beach County School So 2d I Fla I st DCJ Crn:z-Ciorin Torres So 3d Fla Jd DCA Rccause petitioners objection is 267category and not 267document specific they were not required lo file a privilege log I such instances when the creation or a privilege log results in the disclosure of the pri ileged informntion as here the courts have permitted and fashioned alternatives to the traditional privilege log See e.g Nevin Palm Beoch Co1y 5,chool Boord So.lei I fla 1st DCJ Signilicantly the courts have also permilleu less detailed disclosure where the traditional disclosure would reveal the very i11formatio11 snug.ht Ill be protected S.E.C Thrasher WL at I S.D.N.Y Mar Since a traditional privilege log would require Epstein to disclose the very inrormation he seeks to protect as privileged information a categoricul claim of privilcg.e as asserted by Epstein should suffice See US Gerir.:are Medical Supp Inc VL I at S.D ln Dec Florida Uniform Trnde Secrets Act Epstein asserted the privilege to him under the Florida Trade Secrets Act to Interrogatories Nos and Under this Act a trade secret is information including a technique that derives independent economic value from not being generally known by other persons who can obtain economic value rrom its disclosure or use and is the subject or efforts Lo maintain its secrecy FL STAL Trade secrets arc privileged from disclosure by section or the Florida Statmes to wit person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and Lo prevent other persons from disclosing a trade secret owned by that person if the allowance or the privilege will not conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice The privilege may he claimed by the person or the persons agent or employee tAr Epstein as a financier and philanthropist developed and utilizes a technique in his financial acumen and strategies that derives independent economic value rr this technique is disclosed others may obtain economic value from these trade secrets and as such Epstein has taken immense steps to prevent its disclosure Therefore Epstein is claiming his privilege to refuse to disclose the trade secrets in his financial dealings without concealing fraud or otherwise working injustice Epstein asserts this privilege calcgorieally Nevin Plm Beach Cv1y School So 2d rla 1st DCA Cruz-Govin Torres So 3d Fla 3d DC1 Because petitioners objection is category and not document speei fie they were not required lo file a privilege log In such instances vhcrc the creation or a privilege log results in the disclosure or the privileged information as here the courts have permitted and fashioned alternatives to the traditionnl privilege log ee e.g Nerin Palm Jeuch County 5-,chool Bourd Fla Isl DC Significantly the courts have aiso per1it1ed less detailed disclosure where the traditional disclosure would reveal the very information sought to be protected S.E.C Thrasher WL al I S.D.N.Y Mar Since a traditional privilege log would require Epstein lo disclose the very information he seeks to protect as privileged information a categorical claim of pri 267ilcge as asserted hy l:pstein should suffice ce U.S Gerirnre Medical Supp Inc WL at S.I la Dec WOO Pi-irncy Rights of Third Parties Epstein asserted the privacy rights of third parties pursuant to Art of the Florida 011stil11tio11 to lnterro!.!atorics Nos and Article states in relevant part that 267lthc right or the people to be secure in their persons houses papers and effects against communications by any means shall not be violated Art I Fl.1 CONST Article I section of the Florida Constitution specilical ly provides a constitutional right of privacy broader in scope than the protection provided in the United States Constitution Berkdey Eisen So 2d Fla 4th DCA Furthermore 267tcourt orders compelling discovery constitute state action that may impinge on constitutional rights including the constitutional right of privacy id citing to ea/lie Times Co Rhinehart U.S In Berkeley disgruntled investors sued their investment advisor and sought to discover the private information or the inveslor other clients Id Such information was non-discoverable as the non-party clients had not given permission lo be identified or otherwise take any steps inconsistent with reasonable expectation of privacy Id Similarly not one ofEpstein non-party associates/clients has given permission to be identified or otherwise taken any steps inconsistent with a reasonable expectation of privacy prohibiting disclosure Id In 1Vi1?field Div of Pari-Mutuel Wagering So 2d Fla the Florida Supreme Court stated that 267the right of privacy is a fundamental right which ve believe demands the compelling state interest standard This test shilts the burden of proof lo the state lo justify an intrusion on privacy Id al holding that the law in the state or Floridn recognizes an individuars legitimate expectation of privacy in financial I I records Herc Epstein is not legally permitted to waive the right to privacy in financial records for others As such where Edwards"s Interrogatories infringe on the legitimate expectation or privacy in a financial records Epstein does not have the ability to waive this right Epstein asserts this privilege categorically JVe Palm Beach Co1y choo So 2d Fla lst DCA Cruz-Govin Torres So 3d Fla 3d DCJ Because petitioners objection is 267category and not 267document specific they vverc not required to file a privilege log Since a traditional privikgc log would require Epstein to disclose the very inlormation he seeks to proh::ct as privileged inllmnation a categorical elaim of privilege as asserted by Epstein should suffice ee U.S Gericare Medical Suppl Inc WL al S.D Ala Dec II REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION A Constitutional Privileges including the VI and XIV Amendments Epstein asserted his Constitutional Privileges to Requests for Production Nos through including all subparts to wit This Request for Production requires the idcnti Ji cation or the existence of detailed linancial information which communicates statements of fact Fisher United Swtes U.S The act or production itself may implicitly communicate statements of fact that are testimonial in nature United States f-!11bhell U.S have a substantial and reasonabie basis for concern that these statements or fact that are testimonial in nature could reasonably furnish a 267ink in the chain of evidence that could be used to prosecute me in criminal proceedings See ll dfi1wn United Stoles U.S I cmrnot provide answers/responses to questions relating to my financial historv and condition without waivirn2 mv Firth Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights as guaranteed by the United Sta1es Constitution In this Court lvlan:h Order on Edwardss Motion to Strike Epstein responses to financial net worth discovery as untimely this Court recognized and refused to find waiver of Epstcin"s right to assert his Constitutional Privileges under the United Stales Constitution Indeed Epstein has both demonstrated and nrticulated a 267substantial and reasonable basis ror concern that the requested information could 267form a link in the chain or evidence that could be used to prosecute him in criminal proceedings Spccilically should Edwards be successful his ardent quest to invalidme the Non Prosecution Agreement entered into bel veen Epstein and the United Stutes Epstein could face the prospect of future prosecution Therefore Epstein will continue assert to his right to the Constitutional Privileges See Pisco/Ii Stephens Sn 2d Fla 4th DCA Urbanek Ur!wnek So 3d Fla 4th DCA A privilege log must be fikcl lor the purpose of determining the validity or the partys claim of privilege in the requested information FIA R.C!v I However this rule limits the inf"ormation to be included in the privilege log lo that information that is 267otherwise discoverable Id Here this Courts Order or March is clear the information sought by Edwards is not otherwise discoverable as it is protected by Epsteins Fifth Amendment Piivilegc Since the determination bas already been made by this Court that the information requested in the afore-referenced Requests for Production is protected by Epstein Fifth Amendment Privilege the need for the privilege log is obviated See Bankers Sec Ins Co mons So 2d Fla 5th DCA Finally as explained more fully below because Epstein has asserted his Constitutional Privileges to each and every Request for Production in which he also asserte a lditional statutory privileges he cannot prepare a traditional privilege log without waivinl2 his Constitutional Privile!..!.es ld To hold otherwise would eviscerate the 267cry protections afforded by the Constitution Attorney Client Privilege Epstein asserted the Atlorncy/Clicnt Privilege to Request for Production Nos and Any communication to which the attorney-client privilege attaches is 267absolutely immune from disclosure United Services Auto Ass Roth So 2d Fla 4th DCA In this case lwards has brought forth multiple and protracted litigations spanning the years for which the information is requested As a result of this in addition to the ever-present an ongoing threat of criminal prosecution Epstein has engaged in repeated communications with multiple counsels regarding the information requested in these Requests for Production Since the attorney-client privilege is a privilege that cannot be overcome a document by document privilege log is not necessary and a categorical assertion suffices Nevin Pa/1 Beach County Sd100I Jd So 2d Fla I st DC Cruz-Govin Torres So 3d Fla 3d OCA I Because petitioners objection is category and not document specific they were not required to file a privilege log Furthermore the mere production of the documents required to be included in the privilege log would constitute communicative testimony itself that is protected from discovery See Pisco/Ii Stephens So 2d Fla 4th DCA In sueh instances where the creation of a privilege log results in the lisclosurc of the privileged locumcnts as here the courts have permitted and fashioned alternatives lo the traditional privilcgL log See e.g erin lulm uch School Board Sn.2d I I 1st DC Signilicantly the courts have also permilled less detailc discl surc where the traditional disclosure wuuld reveal the YtTY information snunht to be protected 77m1sher WL at S.D.N.Y lvlar Since a traditional privilege log would rcquin Epstein lo disclose the very information he seeks to protect as pri 267ilcgcd information a categorical claim or privilege as asserted by Epstein should surlice See U.S I Crerirnre Medical Supply Inc WL at S.D Ala Dec WOO Work Product Privilege Epstein asserted the work product privilege to Request for Production Nos and Materials prepared in anticipation of litigation are not subject to discovery FL R.Clv Here the parties have been engagcd in protracted litigation spanning not only many years but also several different causes or action luring which time Edwards has sought the discovery of Epstein"s net worth and corresponding financial information As a result of this in addition to the ever present and ongoing threat of criminal prosecution due to Echvardss active litigation in which he seeks to overturn Epsteins Non-Prosecution Agreement Epstein has engaged in protrnctccl preparations in anticipnlion or litigation Therefore all of the requested information is proteded from discovery under the work product privilege The only mitigating foctor to compel discovery of work product is showing that the party seeking discovery has need of the materials in the preparation of the case Ft!deral fap CIJJp 11/llczi So 2d Fla DCA Edwar ls has noL and is not able to do this Since work product privilege cannot be overcome a categorical assertion suffices Nci Pu/1 Beach Counzr chool So 2d I Fla I st DCA Cni::-Gm Torres So Jd Fla Jcl IJCA Because petitioners objection is 267ca1cgo1y md not document specific they were required lo lile a privilege log furthermore the mere production or the infrmnnlion required be included in the privikgc log would constitulc communicative testimony itself that is protected rrom discovery See i.Ycolti tepl,ens So 2d Fla 4th DCA In such instances where the creation or a privilege log results in the disclosure nf the privileged information as here the courts hnve permilled and fashioned alternatives lo the traditional privilege log See e.,I Nevin Palm Beuc/1 C01ly Sc/u Board So.2d I I Fla I st DCA Significantly the courts have also permitted less Jctailcd disclosure where the traditional disclosure would reveal the very information sought Ill be protected Thrasher WL at I S.D.N.Y Mar Since a traditional privilege log would require Epstein to clisclosc the very information he seeks to protect as privileged infornrnlion a categorical claim or privilege as asserted hy Epstein should suffice Sc1e U.S Gericare Medical S11pp Inc WI at S.D Ala Dec I I Accountant Client Privilege Epstein asserted the Accountant/Client Privilege to Request for Production Nos I I and In Florida by statute communications between an accountant and its client are privileged when those communications are made in the connection with the accounting services provided lo the client FLA STAT 267rAJs in all confidential and privileged communications ltlhe justification for the pri 267ilcge lies not in the rel or communication hut in the interest or thi persons concerned that the subject matter should not become public u1 267ino L11Liww Sn 2d Fla quoting Judge Learned land speaking in U11i1ed S101es Kmleiritch F.2d 2d Cir I For the period of time spanned by Edwards Requests for Production Epstein has engaged in repealed communicatinns with multiple accountants Epstein has vigorously shielded this information from disclosure to third parties As such since disclosure of even the rudimentary infrmm11ion required in Ilic privilege log is enough to waive the privilege Epstein asserts this privilege categorically Nelin Palm Beach County School Jd So 2d Fla st DCJ Crnz-Covin Torres 2lJ So 3d Fla 3d DCA I 267Because petitioners objection is 267category and not document specitic they were not required to file a privilege log such instances where the creation of a privilege log ri:sulls in the disclosure or the privileged informnlinn as here the courts have permitted and foshioned alternatives to the traditional privilege log See e.g Nevin Palm Beach School Board Fla I st DCA Significantly the courts have also permitted less detailed disclosure where the traditional disclosure would reveal lhe wry information sought tn be proteded S.E.C Thmsher WL nt S.D.N.Y Mar Since a traditional privilege log would require Epstein to disclose lhc very information he seeks to protect as privileged information a cati:gorical claim or privilege as asserted by Epstein should suffice See U.S Geric:are i Jcdical Suppfr Inc WL al S.I Ala Dec The Florida Uniform Trade Secrets Act Epstein asserted the privilege afforded lo him under the Florida Trade Secrets ct lo Request for Production No Under this Act a track secret is inrormation including i technique that derives independent economic value from not being generally known by other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use and is the subject of effc lo maintain its secrecy FL1 ST/IT Trade secrets are privileged from disclosure by section of the Florida to wit A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent other persons from disclosing a trade secret owned by that person if the allowance of the privilege will not conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice The privilege may be claimed by the person or the persons agent or employee FLA STAT Epstein as a financier and philanthropist developed and utilizes a technique in his financial acumen and strategics that derives independent economic value Ir this technique is disclosed others may obtain economic value from these trade secrets and as such Epstein has taken immense steps to prevent its disclosure Thercrorc Epstein is claiming his privilege to refuse lo disclose the trade secrets in his rinancial dealings without concealing fraud or otherwise working i1 justice Epstein asserts this privilege categorically Nevin Palm Beach Cmmly School So 2d Fla 1st DCA Cruz-Govin Torres So 3d Fla 3d DCA I Because petitioners objection is 267category and not document specific they were not required to file a privilege log In such instances where the creation or a privilege log results in the disclosun or the privileged information as here the courts have permitted and fashioned alternatives to the traditional privilege log Se i Nerin Palm Beach Coumy School Board So.2d I I Fla st DC Significantly the cnurts have also pcrmillcd kss dctaikd disclusun when the traditional disclosure ould reveal the very information sought tn he prutc lcd rhrusher VL at I S.D.N.Y lvlar Since a traditional privilege log would require Epstein to disclose the very information he seeks to protect as privileged information a categorical claim or privilege as 1sscrtcd by l:pslcin should suffice U.S Gericore Medico S11pp Inc WL at S.l Ala Dec Prirncy Rights of Thinl Parties Epstein asserted the privacy rights of third parties pursuant to Art I Sect or the Florida Co11slil11/i to Request for Production Nos Article I states in relevant part that lthc right of the people to be secure in their persons houses papers and effects against communications by any means shall not be violated Art fl.A CONST Article I section or the florida Constitution specifically provides a constitutional right or privacy broader in scope than the protection provided in tile United States Constitution Berkeley Eisen So 2d Fin 4th DCA Furthermore rcJourt orders compelling discovery constitute state action that may impinge on constitutional rights including the constitutional right of privacy id at citing to Times Co Rhinehart U.S In Berkeley disgruntled investors sued their investment advisor and sought to discover the private inlcmnation or the investor"s other clients Id Such information was non-discoverable as the non-party clients had not given permission to be identified or otherwise take any steps inconsistent with a reasonable expectation of privacy Id Similarly not one of Epstein non-party associates/clients has given permission to be identified or otherwise taken any steps inconsistent with a reasonable expectation or privacy prohibiting disc Insure Id In Vin/hld Pari-M1e fl"ugaing So 2d Fla I the Florida Supreme Court stated that rtlhe right or privacy is a fundamental right which we believe demands the compelling state interest standard This test shirts the burden of proof to the stale lo justil an intrusion nn privacy Id at hulding that the law in the state of Florida recognizes an individual"s legitimate expectation of privacy financial I records Herc Epstein is not legally permitted to waive the right to privacy in rinancial records for others such where Edwards Interrogatories infringe on the legitimate expectation of privacy in a financial records Epstein does not have the ability to waive this right Epstein asserts this privilege categorically Nevb1 Palm Beach Co1r chool Bd So 2d Fla I st DC Cru::-Govin Torres So 3d Fla 3d DCA Because petitioners objection is 267category and not 267document specific they were not required lo file a privilege log Since a traditional privilege log would require Ep!-itcin lo disclose the very inlormntion he seeks to protect is privileged information a categorical or privilege as asserted by Epstein should suffice See Gericore Afolicul Supp Inc WL at S.D Ala Dec I I Toi1j.i 1-li ddad Coleman Esq Fla Bar No O1-FICFS OF TONJA DDAD PA SE Street Suite Fort Lauderdale Florida facsimile Tonja tonjahaddacl.com WE IIERH3Y CERTIFY thal a true and correct copy or the l"orcgoing vas scrvc upon all parties listed below via Electronic Service this iylarch lack Scarola Esq Searcy Denney Scarola ct al Palm Beach Lakes Blvd West Palm Beach FL Jack Goldberger Esq Atterbury Goldberger Weiss PA i ustralian Ave South Suite West Palm 13cach FL Marc Nurik Esq I East Broward Blvd Suite Fort Lauderdale FL I Bradley I Edwar ls Esq Ton.fa I l:1ddad Coleman Esq Fla Bar No Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman Andrews Avenue Suite Fort Lauclcrdale Flori la Fred Haddad Esq Financial Plaza Suite Fort Lauderdale FL Tonja Haddad Coleman Esq Tonja Haddad P.A i tree Suite Fort Lauder lak Florida
