EFTA00206624.pdf

Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 214-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02,2010 Page 1 of 10 Past 3 PIP I 1 uurnan STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT I THE COURT: Rothstein Rosenfeldt & Adler. SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP FLORIDA 2 Ali right May I have appearances, please? 2 3 MR. LICHTMAN: Good morning, Judge. 3 4 Chuck Lichtman, Berger Singerman, for the trustee. 4 5 CASE NO: 09-3479143KCHISK $ MIL NE1V/IRTH: Good morning, your Honor. 6 Int 6 Ronald Neiveinh, Fowler White Burnett, on behalf of 7 ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER. P.A., 7 the movant, Epstein, and with me today are two of my s Debtor 8 partners, Chris Knight and Lilly Ann Sanchez — 9 MS. SANCHEZ: Good morning, your Honor. 9 10 MR, K1410HT: Good morning, your Honor, 10 ii II MR. NEINVEZTH: — both of whom are more MOTION TOMO EL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM TRUSTEE I2 familiar with the Stale Court angle on this than I 12 PUR•SUANT TO DOCUMENT PRODUCTION PROTOCOL ESTABUSHEE 13 am, so they came along to be able to elucidate that BY DENTS (907L AMENDED MOTION FOR PROTECTIVEORDER 14 end of it. 13 ($19) 15 MR. FARMER: Good morning, your Honor. 14 16 Gary Fanner on behalf of LM, Brad Edwards, and 15 August 4, 2010 Wasting law firm. We are an 16 17 the Fanner Jaffe 17 TN show-asdard ass came on for 18 interested party and have filed a motion for 16 busing betbre as HONORABLE RAYMOND B. RAY, 19 protective order as to the subpoena that is at 19 one of the Judges oft UHTIED STATES BANKRUPTCY 20 issue here today. 20 COURT, in end fog the SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, 21 THE COURT: All right Insofar as the 21 H799 End Browsed Bas, F get usereac. Browses 22 TD Bank motion, Docket Entry 780, that has been the 22 County, Plod& on Itchy, August 4, 2010, matter of an agreed order that was submitted 23 COEUTPXKling•101 0)000130 LIM, mid the loam% 23 subject 24 pectedings wen had: 24 to me. 25 Rebated EN Malin Fit= 25 MR. LICHTMAN: Correct, Judge. Paget Page 4 I APPEARANCES: I THE COURT: Mr. Scherer. 2 2 MR. SCHERER: Yes, sir, your Honor. 3 DERV-RW/90SW" to CHARLES H. LICHTMAN, ESQUIRE 3 I'm William Soberer and Ern here on behalf of a 4 on OW ref te Thew 4 number of victims in the State Court action, as s $ well as the chairman of the creditors' committee 6 CONRAD & SCHERER, by WILLIAM R. SCHERIN, ESQUIRE 6 in the bankruptcy. 7 or, beholtof victims 7 THE COURT: All right. That leaves us with s 8 Docket Entry 807 and 819. 807 is Jeffrey Epstein's 9 FOWLER WHITE BURNETT, by RONALD 0. NEMIRTM ESQUIRE 9 motion. 10 LILLY ANN SANCHEZ, ATTORNEY-ATLAW 10 MR. NEIWIRTH: Thank you, your Honor, and CHRISTOPHER B KNIGHT, ESQUIRE It JOSEPH L ACKERMAN, ESQUIRE I I again, good morning. We represent Jeffrey Epstein. re Woad lathy Wale 12 He has a civil claim pending in State Court in 12 13 Paint Beach County. He had served a subpoena on !3 FARMER JAPER WEISSING EDWARDS F1STOS & LEHRMAN. by 14 Mr. Stettin requesting doctunents from the RRA estate. 14 GARY PAPJAHR. ESQUIRE 15 That was back in April. BRAD EDWARDS. ESQUIRE 16 While this was still in process, in 15 out getlf NUL BM Edwards and Forma Rage %Wig Etats Fl3t0$ 4 Lchrman 17 May, under Docket Entry 672, your Honor entered 16 18 an order standardizing procedures for obtaining 17 19 discovery from Mr. Stettin and the RRA estate, is 20 and at least on the face of it, it aka 19 21 jurisdiction ova all discovery efforts against 20 22 the trustee. That left us in a quandary. 21 72 23 We had a subpoena pending in State 23 24 Court. We had correspondence from Berger 24 25 25 Singcrman on behalf of the trustee dist they had °UM-LEITH & MAULDIN COURT REPORTERS, (305) 3584875 EFTA00206624 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 214-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2010 Page 2 of 10 Pep? Pap 5 I identified information and they were processing I taken jurisdiction over these discovery matters 2 it, including vetting for attorney/client 2 and attempted to standardize discovery efforts 3 privilege issues, but then In the meantime came 3 for the trustee. There's a lot ofpeople that 4 your Honor's order on May 18th, so we had to go 4 want things from the trustee. 5 The trustee is overseeing an estate 5 back and reinvent the wheel and go through the 6 which involved somewhere in excess of70 lawyers 6 necessary hoops in order to comply with that In the meantime, as we sit here now, we 7 and lots of cases and lots ofproblems, and 7 8 literally millions of documents, and we have 8 still have no production. We have a trial date 9 absolutely no problem with the standardized 9 coming up in October, and we have a motion for 10 order, but that means that somehow or other wo 10 protective order corning from a party who's 11 have to be able to deal with it in a standardized 11 already settled out, the LM party. They DO 12 manner, instead ofMr. Fames suggestion, which 12 longer have anything directly to do with this. 13 Further, we are advised by the 13 is go back to Slate Court and deal with it over 14 there. 14 creditors' committee that in addition to what was THE COURT: What is the status of the State 15 15 proffered to us, that at some point In time there 16 Court proceeding? 16 had been something like ten boxes of records MR. NEIWIRTH: May I defer to my partner, 17 pertaining to these particular issues and someone 17 18 who is more familiar with that? I8 on behalf of the victims had been given, or MR. KNIGHT: Your Honor, Christopher 19 19 several someones, had been given access to those 20 Knight, if I may? While we were waiting for the 20 ten boxes and had viewed them, which would 21 documents from the Stettin office, we obviously 21 vitiate any attorney/client privilege in any 22 wanted to go down two tracks because we had an 22 event So what we are trying to do is fashion 23 October trial date. The status of it is we could not 23 24 a mechanism so we can comply with your order, 24 come to an agreement with the other side. 25 Mr. Ackerman was at the last bearing, in which the 25 Docket 672, about standardized means ofgetting sages Page6 1 judge said, one, !need a representative of the 1 production from the trustee, allow for the 2 trustee here and two, shouldn't this be back before 2 appropriate vetting of the materials for 3 you, Judge Ray. 3 attorney/client privilege, and we must bear in 4 THE COURT: You can't proceed against 4 mind that this is one objector, there's a lot Rothste in in the State Court, they're here. 5 5 more documents than that 6 MR. KNIGHT: And that ill the same thing I 6 To the best of our knowledge, the 7 think Judge Crow recognized, and that's why we're 7 documents that pertain to the IAA party, who is 8 back here, and that's why we had to file the motion. 8 settled anyway, may be 15 percent of those which MR. ACKERMAN: The claim against 9 9 are responsive to the Inquiry that we made of the 10 Rothstein is against him Individually, and it's 10 trustee, but in any event, someone has to vet II against Brad Edwards individually, and it was II them for attorney/client privilege and do a 12 against one of the claimants, IAA individually. 12 privilege log. 13 TIM COURT: So it's not againstthe debtor 13 Now, Mr. Partner's office on behalfof 14 estate. 14 LM wants to do that We don't think Mars 15 MR. ACKERMAN: That's correct. 15 appropriate. We think the privilege at this 16 MR. KNIGHT: Just to go a little further on 16 point, since the case is settled, lies with RRA 17 what Mr. NoiwIrth was saying. Out of these documents 17 and, therefore, the trustee, rather than 18 we've been asking for for a long time, very few of the 18 Mr. Fanner and his client, because as to them 19 them would even have privilege on their face because 19 case is over. 20 they have nothing to do with the clients that were 20 Furthermore, we don't think there is 21 represented, what's been called as LM 21 any privilege because the boxes have been vetted 22 If there's going to be a log. if 22 before and we'll hear more about that from 23 there's any need, which I don't think there is 23 Mr. Scherer, I assume, because he was the one 24 because I think privilege has been waived, it 24 that was aware of that. 25 needs to be a log put together by the trustee, 25 And last, but not least, your Honor has .... .___ ...... ...,..... _ ..._,...--_____,. .... ,_.. 2 (Pages S to 8) OUELLETTE Bs MAULDIN COURT REPORTERS, INC. (305) 3584875 EFTA00206625 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 214-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09'02,2010 Page 3 of 10 Pate 9 ha ll I not anybody else that has some sort of interest I everybody first 2 in it 2 MR. KNIGHT: Okay. 3 If there's a problem with payment for 3 MR. FARMER: Thank you, your Honor, may it 4 those, et cetera, our client has already offered 4 please the Court Again, Gary Fanner on behalfof 5 to the trustee, to Mr. Lk:lumen, we will pay for 5 the interested party, LM, also on behalf of 6 it, whether ifs a special master or whether it's 6 Brad Edwards and I'm softy, your Honor, Mr. Edwards 7 a contract attorney, If they need to do that, but 7 is here with me. I neglected to introduce him to the 8 I don't think wo even need to reach that. 8 Court earlier. 9 I think these documents are long 9 MR. EDWARDS: Good morning, your Honor. 10 overdue. They have been produced to others, they 10 MR. FARMER: There has been a lot of 11 have been used in depositions for others, they II discussion here about your Honor's standardized 12 are out there, and ! think the privilege issue is 12 production order and I think that you need to 13 just being used as a smoke screen to keep our 13 undastand that this particular matter, which is 14 client from being able to get the documents he 14 before you today, is anything but standard or common 15 needs to be able to prove his cast. 15 to the matters before this Court. 16 Thank you. 16 You need to understand the nature of 17 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honor, one other 17 the case. Jeffrey Epstein is an admitted 18 matter. Judge Crow expressed a concern about 18 convicted pedophile. He sexually assaulted 19 entering any order against the trustee or his 19 dozens and dozens of young girls under the age of 20 counsel without them being present. 20 15. He pled guilty to this and he has settled 21 Initially we had filed a motion to 21 every civil lawsuit filed against him on this 22 compel in the State Court, but we didn't realize 22 issue. 23 at the time or It was unclear, because we had 23 Despite all of this, Mr. Epstein has 24 just taken over the case from another law firm, 24 seen fit to file a lawsuit against LM, who is one 25 that the Court had entered its order. 25 of the plaintiffs against him; against Pate 10 sage a 1 There was some discussion prior to the 1 Brad Edwards, LM's attorney; and against 2 hearing and when we went to the hearing, it was 2 Mr. Rothstein. 3 clear that there was no agreement that had 3 Now, Edwards, myself, and all the 4 existed and Judge Crow said, I'm not entering an 4 members of our fi rm were RRA attorneys when 5 order, I'm not doing anything on this motion 5 Mr. Rothstein took his ill-fated trip to Morocco 6 undl the bankruptcy trustee is represented. 6 and did the things which are now so well known, 7 Ho was concerned because this Court's 7 but the filet of the matter is that this discovery 8 order had set up the standardized procedure for 8 request is a blatant attempt to obtain clearly 9 dealing with these arguments and had reserved 9 privileged documents related to the 10 jurisdiction relating to any subpoena or request 10 representation of LM and many other victims, by 11 for documents from the trustee. so that's why 11 the way. 12 we're here now. 12 And if I can show your Honor a copy of 13 THE COURT: All right. 13 the subpoena itself, l don't third( that the 14 MR KNIGHT: Your Honor, just one other 14 breadth of the subpoena has been adequately 15 point We tried to work, and we've been working with 15 represented to the Court. If you peruse this, 16 Mr. Lichtman, tried to work out a protective order 16 you will see they are asking for communications 17 between the trustee and Epstein regarding the 17 with private investigators, they're asking for 18 subpoena. Mr. Liebe:um and Ms. Sanchez agreed to 18 contingency fee contracts, they're asking for 19 language on it I have a copy of it 19 every communication between any member of the 20 Mr. Farmer, with his motion for 20 firm, and they throw Rothstein in just to make it 21 protective order, would not agree to that, but if 21 sexy, about these cases. 22 the Court would like to have a copy of what the 22 Now, your Honor. clearly communication 23 draft was, I will approach your clerk, but if you 23 about the representation of a client falls under 24 do not want that, I also — 24 not only the work product, but If the client is 25 THE COURT: Well, let me hear from 25 involved in the communication, also the 3 (Pages 9 to 12) OUELLETTE & MAULDTts: COURT REPORTERS, INC. (305) 358-8875 EFTA00206626 Case 9 08-cv-80893-KAM Document 214-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09 02 2010 Page 4 of 10 Pas ii rase i s I attorney/client privilege. 1 Mr. Scherer's clients, who have clans before 2 Now, most of this stuff we've already 2 this Court, and hopefully they will get sane form responded and said none, none, none, but for many 3 of relief from the Bankruptcy Court, Epstein is 3 4 of these items, we have asserted the privilege 4 not seeking any bankruptcy assets. He's suing 5 and we continue to assert the privileg e. 5 Brad Edwards and 1.14 personally, and Scott Now, the only reason the trustee is 6 Rothstein, and ifs not an estate claim, it's 6 here — 7 against Scott Rothstein personally. 7 THE COURT: Walt, there's been a privilege 8 So my suggestion, your Honor, is that 8 9 you instruct the trustee to turn this electronic 9 asserted in the State Court procee ding? 10 docume ntation information over to us. We will 10 MR. FARMER: Yes, sir. there is a privileg e log 11 file the approp riate privilege log with the 11 THE COURT: And who is presiding over the 12 Circuit Court judge 12 and the judge has made a Sing? is most familia r with the case, who MR. FARMER: No. The dispute now really is 13 case, who 13 be conside ring thc upcom ing motion for 14 will 14 over who's going to file the privilege log and judgme nt, and possibl y trying the case, sugges t is that the 15 summa ry 15 respectfully, Judge, what we and that way your Honor is not burden ed with this 16 16 trustee has been thrust into this matter simply incur fees and 17 because the trustee stands in the shoes ofall the 17 matter, the trustee does not 18 former attorne ys at RRA, and the trustee is likewis e 18 expenses ofhaving to go through all of these to the cases and 19 documents, prepare a privilege log and our 19 bound by the privileges that attach 20 client and Mr. Edwards — Mr. Edwards is also a 20 to the lawyers that were at the firm. 21 The trustee has repeatedly acknow ledged 21 party of that lawsuit He enjoys his own 22 privilege, your Honor, over and above, or in 22 the fact that it Is bound by those privileges 23 and, of course, as your Honor knows, the 23 addition to, I should say, the privilege 24 privilege belongs to the client, not to any 24 possessed by ow former client and, of course, I 25 lawyer or any law firm. 25 know coaasel knows that the privilege extends Tata 16 ?age 14 So the trustee is really kind ofstuck 1 beyond the litigation. I So although Mr. Epstein paid a ton of 2 2 in the middle hero. You've got the pedophile who 3 money for this claim that is supposedly 3 wants documents related to the cases he's already 4 frivolous, it has been settled, but the privilege 4 settled and pled guilty for. Those documents, 5 the electronic documents, at least, the e-mails, 5 still extends and it remains In place. So we 6 simply want to make sure that our investigative 6 electronically stored Information is how it's 7 referred to in the discovery request, your Honor, 7 materials, our reports, other documentation 8 relating to the claims we have and have had 8 are not In our possession, they are in the 9 against Jeffrey Epstein are not put into the 9 possession of the trustee because the trustee 10 hands of Jeffrey Epstelo's attorneys. 10 took the computer system. 11 Now, we just want the chance to review I1 So the trustee doesn't want to incur 12 these documents and prepare the privilege log and 12 the cost and expense of filing a privilege log 13 the trustee Is kind ofstuck In the middle here, 13 and, frankly, I don't know that the trustee has a 14 Judge. Remove the trustee from the equation, let 14 full appreciation of the nature and specific 15 us get the documents, we'll file the privilege 15 acts of the cases that would enable it to 16 log, and then Mr. Epstein and us can go before 16 conduct a complete privilege log. So my suggestion, your Honor, and it's 17 Judge Crow. He can review the privilege log, 17 18 review the documents in camera. 18 been rejected --1believe ifs acceptable to the All that is going to be pretty time 19 19 trustee, but it's been rejected by Mr. Epstein's 20 consuming, but he's much more suited, a better 20 counsel, is the trustee be removed from this 21 suited judge because he's more familiar with the 21 equation. There's no need that we come back 22 facts to engage in that inquiry. 22 before you. 23 THE COURT: Thank you. 23 This case, this Epstein case, is not a MR. FARMER: Thank you, your Honor. 24 24 matter which would involve bankruptcy estate THE COURT: Mr. Lichtman, Mr. Scherer, your 25 25 assets going to Mt. Epstein. Unlike 4 (Pµges 13 to 16 OUELLETTE & MAULDIN COURT REPORTERS, INC. (305)358-8875 EFTA00206627 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 214-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09'02,2010 Page 5 of 10 Putt 17 Pas 19 I input, please. I allegations in the LM case that they knew were MR. L1CHTMAN: I'm going to let Mr. Scherer 2 not true, in order to entice my clients into 2 3 believing that Bill Clinton was on the airplane 3 go first. 4 MR. SCHERER: I think he wants me to go 4 with Mr. Epstein and these young woman and other 5 first. 5 personages, I can't remember who they are, and 6 THE COURT: All right. 6 all sorts of other allegations that really were MR. SCHERER: Your Honor, in Novem ber 7 not even related to the LM case. 7 8 And to the extent that any lawyers from 8 we filed a lawsuit in State Court and we alleged firm, limner lawyers, made a ton of money and the firm, and 9 the RRA 9 that as a part ofMr. Rothstein r Mr. Farmer talked about it, we're 10 or howeve 10 the firm's employees, and maybe some ofthe ed in that ton of money ben,,se if they to the Epstein /LM II interest 11 firm's attorneys, conspired use d In this scheme, this fraud, there's 12 were involve 12 litigation in order to lure $13.5 million worth exception, and in addition, l want making 13 a crime fraud 13 ofmy victims, my clients, into ten boxes that they brought down. 14 to see the 14 investments in these phoney settlements. The trustee does not have those tea And as we alleged in that State Court 15 15 boxes. Those ten boxes were taken by Mr. Edwards 16 16 proceeding, and we've sharpened the allegations firm, I presume. So we want 17 as we've amended a few times, we edits* that 17 when he left the law 18 the ten boxes, we want all the communications and 18 sometime in late October, that my clients were everyth ing on behalf of 19 invited into the Rothstein finn with 19 we want to look through 20 my State Court case, but also on behalfof the 20 Mr. Rothstein, and he explained that he had a rs' commit tee because the creditors' with Mr. Edward s 21 credito 21 litigation going in State Court 22 committee is looking to see if anybody else in 22 representing LM, a victim ofMr. Epstein, and ons and 23 the firm, other than Rothstein, was involved in 23 these are kind ofsensational allegati this massive fraud that used the Epstein case. 24 24 it's been printed widely. The model of using an existing case and And my clients, a number of them and 25 25 Pao 20 Par IS then spinning off a fraud from it is the same I their lawyer, went into the Rothstein conference 2 that was perpetrated on the Morse — in the Morse 2 room and Mr. Rothstein brought down — summoned 3 situation, as has been alleged and widely 3 the investigators, two of them, two or three of 4 produced. 4 them, to bring down the Epstein file. And the I can't conceive that Mr. Edwards and 5 5 lawyer that my clients brought from a national that 6 the predecessor law firm would have any standir.g 6 finn, went through the LM boxes, ten of them 7 to prepare privilege logs or anything else, given 7 the investig ators brough t down, and conclud ed 8 what I just told the Court. That would be like 8 that the Epstein ease was a real case. 9 having the fox guard the hen house. That Epstein 9 And what Mr. Rothstein did with that 10 case is settled, and to the extent it's the ten 10 real case, ofcourse, is he told everybody that 1t boxes of stuff that we looked through, and I'll I I not only did he have the LM client of 12 have to get the boxes to see if the attorney who 12 Mr. Edwards, that there were a number ofother 13 looked through them, and how much time he spent 13 young ladies, that was widely published in the 14 looking through them — 14 newspaper, that the firm was representing and THE COURT: Where are the ten boxes? 15 15 that wanted to settle with Mr. Epstein on a MR. SOBERER: That's a good question. 16 confidential basis. 16 17 The trustee does not have the ten boxes. I 17 So he used the real case in order to 18 presume the ten boxes are residing with the 18 defraud my clients into investing into these 19 lawyers who took the case, Mr. Edwards and the 19 phoney settlements and paid 13 and a halfmillion 20 successor law finn. The trustee does not have 20 dollars. I believe that Mr. Rothstein and others 21 them. And then in addition, dimes about 6,000 21 in the firm also told that story to a lot of 22 e-mails that the trustee has, and I bet you when 22 other people, and let a lot of other people 23 we look at Qtask, there's going to be a boatloa d 23 examine those ten boxes of the real case. 24 more. 24 In addition, as we have alleged, that My clients were also advised during Edward s and the firm put sensational 25 25 Mr. 5 (Pages 17 to 20) OUELLETTE & MAULDIN COURT REPORTERS, INC. (305)358-8875 EFTA00206628 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 214-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09:02,2010 Page 6 of 10 vacs 21 No 23 I their due diligence, short due diligence to 1 to take those ten boxes to start with. 2 settle these cases with these young ladies — 2 THE COURT: All right Mr. Lichtman. 3 these putative young ladies who had to get the 3 MR. LICHTMAN: Good morning, Judge. rm 4 money and leave town because of whatever the 4 going to try to walk you through sort of 5 stories were, that there were other members of 5 chronologically the trustee's perspective of what has 6 the firm that told my clients that they, indeed, 6 happened here. 'think that what Eve heard from all 7 had even identified more of these victims that 7 the parties are comments that aro correct, and not 8 Mr. Rothstein didn't even know about at that 8 necessarily correct, and Pm not suggesting 9 time. So we know it wasn't just Mr. Rothstein 9 falsehoods. We just have kind of a different 10 spinning the talc, there were a lot ofpeople in 10 perspective of some things and there arc some points 11 the firm. 11 that ought to be corrected. 12 We've alleged almost all of this in our 12 Mr. Stettin received a subpoena in a 13 State Court action that we filed in November, up 13 Palm Beach State Court action for production of 14 to where we are right now, but, your Honor, 1 14 documents, and as we had done in virtually every 15 think your Honor is going to have to deal with 15 subpoena, we went to ow forensic accountants, 16 these issues in this court and I would urge you 16 the Berkowitz Dick Pollack & Brent firm, and 17 to have the trustee get involved and let the 17 said, okay, we need to produce canails and we 18 trustee do its job with respect to whether there 18 need to also them with the staff that we have at 19 are privileges that need to be protected, work 19 Berger Singennan and elsewhere, and look to see 20 product or attorney/client privileges, given 20 if there are any hard documents that we can fmd, 21 Ames going on, and I believe the trustee will 21 notwithstanding what we'll call the issues as to 22 be investigating whether the trustee wants to 22 the RRA hard drive that contain client files. 23 bring any claims on behalf of the estate by 23 We quickly realized that this Is a 24 virtue of what I've just laid out for you. 24 claim different than all of the other subpoenas. 25 Thank you. 25 The subpoenas that we had been receiving from Pest 22 ?ago 24 1 THE COURT: So your lawsuit in State Court 1 virtually every other party in the case were 2 names these people as defendants? 2 requests for production of documents related to 3 MR. SCHERER: It names Rothstein. It 3 claims that those moving parties or requesting 4 does not name Mr. Edwards. It just names 4 parties would have 83 it pertains to them trying 5 Rothstein, not the firrn, and lays out the facts 5 to recover some aspect of money as pertained to 6 and says other people in the firm. We did not 6 the Pond scheme. 7 name them because we want to see the documents 7 Okay. Lice Mr. Scherer, who said 1 8 and see whether they had involvement. 8 need a bunch of documents, am you help us? So 9 But the facts that I have alleged for 9 we would enter into, on a one by one basis, a 10 you, your Honor, is pretty much what I've alleged 10 protective order that was very, very tightly II in my first through third amended complaint in II negotiated. There is no standard fain protective 12 State Court 12 order in this case, contrary to what everybody 13 THE COURT: So, In essence, your position 13 has told you. We have a form that we use, and 14 in this matter would be to support the motion to 14 everybody that has come to us, we said, we need 15 compel and deny the motion for protective order? 15 to have a protective order in place -- 16 MR. SCHERER: Yes, sir, notwithstanding 16 THE COURT: We have Docket Entry 672, which 17 that Mr. Epstein is a convicted pedophile. I 17 apparently Is the document production protocol. 18 want to put that on the record. You know, he's 18 MR. LICHTMAN: We have that, yes, but then l9 served his lime and whatever, but 1support the 19 we also, as an example, Document 685, have a 20 same position that he -- that he has asked the 20 protective order that was entered with Mr. Schera's 21 Court, and that is to have the trustee deal with 21 clients. We have, as an example, Document 715 that 22 this, get these documents and deal with it with 22 pertains to MS Capital, and on and on. 23 you, rather than allow the successor law firm to 23 So, in any event, what we realized is 24 have them. 24 the case with respect to the Epstein vs. Scott 25 I don't know where they had the right 25 Rothstein, Bradley Edwards case, is this is 6 (Pages 21 to 24 OUELLETTE & MAULDIN COURT REPORTERS, INC. (335)358-8875 EFTA00206629 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 214-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2010 Page 7 of 10 Paten Pose 27 1 different. This is not an asset either to the 1 MR. LICHTMAN: Qtask is not part of this 2 RRA estate, nor is it really an asset to any 2 equation as of right now. Now, it maybe, and we're 3 potential creditor of the RRA estate that is 3 still tying to get that. I'm just talking about 4 investigating claims that can bring a recovery 4 internal e-mails where we would put in a name search, 5 that can help in term of the overall dollars 5 give it to the Berkowitz finn and say, run en e-mail 6 into either RRA or to a particular creditor on 6 search on the following names. 7 their individual lawsuits. 7 And when we realized the volume of 8 The Epstein case, rather, is a lawsuit 8 work, and you can imagine, you know, Ince from a 9 between a third party that was being sued by the 9 ream of paper, 500 sheets of paper, and you 10 multiply that out and you got to 12 reams of that 10 Rothstein earn against Rothstein lawyers, and we 11 had a different privilege issue than we had 11 paper, it takes up a lot of paper, it takes up a 12 focused on with all these other document 12 tremendous amount of time. This is not an asset 13 productions. 13 of the estate that we can, if we have to, warrant 14 So we get the 6,000 e-mails, and on the 14 doing the work. the hard work, as we've done on 15 eve of one of my colleagues getting ready to 15 many of the other claims, some of which already 16 enter into — either enter into one of these 16 are before you for settlement purposes. This is 17 protective orders or say, here, take them, like 17 a liability to the estate and an expensive one. 18 So we really didn't want to go through I8 we've done with everybody else, we looked up and 19 Mr. Stettin and I said, time out. We have a 19 the undertaking of having to protect the 20 legitimate privilege issue here. 20 privilege, though we would, and candidly, 21 And I want to be clear, we don't want 21 Epstein's comsat has said we'll pay you to do 22 it, but then there's also the manpower issue 22 to conic anywhere close to stepping in the mess of 23 waiving attorney/client privilege, unless and 23 because we are pressed very hard to get certain 24 until the Court tells us to, and I want to also 24 adversaries moving as quickly as we can and we're 25 be clear, we wish we weren't here. We would 25 fighting a lot of battles on a lot of different Page 24 PIP 26 I grounds, we still really don't want to do that, prefer not to have a fight on any of this stuff 2 and also because we don't know the Epstein case 1 2 and on one hand, we don't care who does the 3 well enough to be able to assess what is 3 privilege log and who gets the documents, and on 4 privileged, what Is not, and preparing a 4 the other hand, because of some things that 5 privilege log the proper way is