EFTA01070533.pdf

Cag$9_9_101-_CV-8019:KAM Document 207-4 Entered on FLSD. Docket 07/20/2009 Page 20_of 46. Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 Page 2 of 2 C.M.A. vs. Epstein, et a Cose No.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant's First Interrogatonin y III nation and each medical -Facility where you have received as to each the case; and state for the injuries for which you seek damages in this for which you were ion date of treatment or examination and the injury or condit examined or treated. ANSWER Dr. Serge Thys (Psychiatrist) Date: I do not recall the date. I would defer 2151 451h Street to the Doctor's records. West Palm Beach, FL. 3M07 school. Ongoing. M I Pope (Counselor/Therapist) Date: Since high Parent Child Center 2001 W. Blue Heron Boulevard physicians, medical facilities, 12. List the names and business addresses of all other other health care t providers rehab facilities (drug, alcohol or psychiatric) or counselor and chiropractors by including psychiatrist, psychologist, mental health or treated in the past 10 years; and whom or at which you have been examined ent and the condition or Injury state as to each the dates of examination or treatm for which you were examined or treated. ANSWER Good Samaritan Hospital (3/12/04, 3/25/08) Child Birth 1309 N Flagler Dr West Palm Beach, FL 33401 St. Mary's Hospital (4/07) DNC 901 45th Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 Gloria C. Hakkarainen, MD Ob/Gyn 2926 10th Avenue North, Suite 306 Palm Springs, FL. 33461 Theodore Ritota, DDS Dentist 14 EFTA01070533 Case 9:08- cv-80119-KAM Document 207-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2009 Page 21 of 46 Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/20_9 0 ag 9lf.A PiSge Page 1 703 So.2d 1076 703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly 172375,23 14a. L. Weekly D169 (Cite at 703 So.2d 1076) 307Ak31 k. Relevancy end Materiality. District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fifth District. Most Cited Cases Party may be permitted to discover:evidence that Kimberly EALAS and Teresa Shumate, Petitioners, v. would be inadmissible at alai, if it would lead to Marjorie A. RUZZO, and Exec., Inc., etc., Re- discovery of relevant evidence. Westb P.S.A. RCP spondents. Rule 1.280(6)(1). No. 97-82. 83] Pretrial Procedure 307A oti=36.3 Oct. 10, 1997. 307A Pretrial Procedure As Modified on Grant of Clarification Jan. 2, 1998., p ‘ci 5.na . I : tic% • 307AII Depositions and Discovery i kkaskm 307A11(A) Discovery In General of ‘cc‘en ), Plaintiffs brought action against alleged house 307Ak36 Particular Subjects cif Disclos- ure prostitution for, inter ails, coercion of prostitu tion. County , Frank Pound, 307Ak36.1 k in General. Most Cited The Circuit Court, Brevard dis- Cases J., granted in part defendants' motion to compel Evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and their covery. Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of certior- W. Sharp, J., held revenues relating to such activities, including activ- ari. The District Court of Appeal, ities with alleged house of prostitution against that evidence of plaintiffs' past prostitution and which they had filed suit, was discoverable, where their revenues relating to such activities was dis- plaintiffs brought action not only for coercion of coverable. prostitution, but also for battery, fplse imprison- ment, invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of Petition denied. emotional distress, violation of their civil rights, and racketeering. Violent Crime Coital and Law Harris, J., concurred specially and filed opinion. U.S.C.A. § Enforcement Act of 1994, § 40302, 13981; West's F.S.A. §6 772.014, 796.09; West's West Headnotes frSA. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). Lind- co Pretrial Procedure 307A C=>31 41076 Richard E. Johnson and Heather Fisher for Peti- say, of Spriggs & Johnson, Tallahassee, tioners. 307A Pretrial Procedure 307A11 Depositions and Discovery 307A11(A) Discovery in General Mark S. Peters of Arerui, Therlac Bc Elsenmenger, 307Ak31 lc Relevancy and Materiality. P.A., Cocoa, for Respondents. Most Cited Cases Discovery In civil cases must be relevant to subject W. SHARP. Judge. matter of case and must bo admissible or reason- ably calculated to lead to admissi ble evidenc e. Balm and Shumate petition this court for a writ of West's RSA. RCP Rule 1.280(b)(1). certiorari to review certain portions of the lower court's order which granted, in pert, a motion to 12] Pretrial Procedure 307A rO=31 compel discovery filed by respondents Ruzzo and RCM, Inc. Petitioners argue that Chase portions de- 307A Pretrial Procedure part from Me essential requirements Of law end will 307All Depositions and Discovery them irreparable harm because they will be cause 307A11(A) Discovery in General 2009 Thomson Routers/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. ESCHIBIT p Split&prft=HTMLE&ifm 3/26/2009 EFTA01070534 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 207-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2009 Page 22 of 46 Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 PPaeg2e5gf 8 Page 2 703 So.2d 1076 D169 703 So.2d 1076,22 Fla.I,. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly (Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) titionere against their will. Count IV alleges that re- compelled to disclose intimate details of their sexu- s Ondente actions constituted an invasion of peti- al hist sac m tioners' privacy. Count Bales and Shumate filed suit against Ramo and Ex- donut infliction of emotional distress. ,Count VI al- leges a civil rights action-that respondents have vi- ec, Inc., doing business as "The Boardroom." Ac- cording to Bales and Shumate, The Boardroom op- olated petitioners' right to be free from mimes of vi- erates ostensibly as *1077 a leisure spa but actually olence motivated by gender within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. section 13981. Finally, count VII seeks is a house of prostitution. Batas worked at The civil remedies for criminal practices of racketeering Boardroom from December 1993 until February pursuant to section 772.104, Florida tStatutes. The 1996; Shumate worked there from October 1992 petitioners claim that they suffered emotional pain, until March 1996. Ruzzo, the sole officer and anguish, humiliation, insult, indignity; loss of self- shareholder of Exec, Inc., collected about fifty to esteem, inconvenience, hurt and emotional distress. sixty percent of each employee? earnings from per- They seek an award of general and punitive dam- forming sexual acts. ages, among other relief. According to Bales and Shumate, Rune exerted The discovery to which the petitioners are being re- mental and emotional control over her employees gutted to respond Is as follows: and thus she was able to exploit them as prostitutes. Ruzzo required her employees to pay her substan- tial sums of money to attend "metaphysical work- I. shops" conducted by Ruzzo or persons associated with her. At the work place, the employees were re- Interrogatory 8; Please advise how long have you s quired to participate in religious and quasi-religiou been engaged in prostitution.... "circles," rituals and incantations. These practices were allegedly designed to break down the person- alities of the women who worked for Ruzzo and to IL one foster dependency and loyalty to herself. At when the earning s of a new employ ee were time Interrogatory 221 State with &peachy the man- missing and believed to be stolen, Ruzzo required ner in which the acts as described in your Com- that the petitioners be strip searched and body cav- plaint have materially affected hod.: you interact be- ity searched. Ruzzo caused the petitioners to with your husband, boyfriend, fiancee' [sic] or ed employ ment was depende nt on lieve their continu any other individual of the opposite Sex. they their submission to these searches and that might be arrested on felony charges if they refused to submit to the searches. lit int Batas and Shumate's second amended compla Request for Production 30: A copy of any photo- seven counts. Count I Is an against Ruzzo contains graphs, movies or videotapes in which you per- sec- action for coercion of prostitution pursuant to formed sexual acts and/or simulated sexual acts the tion 796.09, Florida Statutes. Petitioners allege in exchange for money or other consideration. requirement that they perform sexual acts to retain coer- their employment constitutes Inducement end • cion to engage in prostitu tion. Count II Is a claim touching IV. for battery for the unwanted and offensive for of the petitioners' bodies. Count III is a claim Interrogatory 16: Please list the names, addresses, nment for physica lly confinin g the pe- false impriso telephone numbers and rates of pay for all em- ployers for which you worked. Including the Works. 2009 Thomson ReutersfWest. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Split&prffr-HTMI,E&ifta=NotSet&mt... 3/26/2009 liltp://web2.vatatlaw.com/ptint/printstream.aspx?sv= EFTA01070535 Case 9:08-ov-80119-KAM Document 207-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2009 Page 23 of 46 Page 3 of 8 Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2099 F".ge 3of 8 Page 3 703 So.2d 1076 1)169 703 Sold 1076,22 PIe. L. Weekly 1)2375, 23 FILL Weekly (Cite Mt 703 So.2d 1076) nature, custody, condition, and location of any nature of the work, during the five years inttnetti- bunks, documents. or other tangible things and the data of employm t *di th the identity and location of persons;having know- day Boardroom and from the date of your termination ledge of any discoverable matter. It, is not ground with the Boardroom to the present, providing the for objection that the information sought will be names of your immediate supervisors at each Inadmissible at the trial if the inforination sought place of employment and the reason far your appears reasonably calculated to lead to the dis- leaving each place of employment. covery of admissible evidence. • V. Nonetheless, the discovery of certain kinds of in- formation may cause material Injury:of an irrepar- able nature. This includes the "cat-out-of-the-bag" Interrogatory 26: Please state your total income material that could be used to injure another person while employed at the Boardroom, and state the or party outside the context of the litigation, mated - source of that Income including any income from al protected by privilege, trade mortis or work other employment or non income earned from product. Discovery was never intended to be used prostitution other than at the Boardroom. as a tactical tool to harass, embarrass or annoy ones adversary. Rather, pretrial discovery was im- VI. plemented to simplify the issues in a: case, to elim- inate the elements of surprise, to encourage the set- tlement of cases, to avoid the cost of litigation, and Request for Production 34: Business records from to achieve a balanced search for the Guth to ensure s any selfemployment or owned business venture a fair trial. Elkins v. Syken, 672 Sold 517 (Pla.1996). the last 5 years, includin g any records or list of in customers, "special customer lisle or "sugar Here the petitioners argue that the Information daddy's list." sought to be discovered regarding prostitution and t to their sexual activities was propounded solely to em- MR) Discovery in civil cases must be relevan barrass them and to invade their right to privacy. the subject matter of the case and must be admiss- The petitioners alto claim that this Information is ble ible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissi privileged under section 796.09 and is not calcu- evidence. See Allstate Insurance Co. v. Langston, lated to lead to evidence which would be admiss- 655 So.2d 91 (Pla.1995); Amerce v. Newman, 653 ible at trial. So.2d 1030 (Fla-1995); Russell v. Stardust Cnds- The ers, Inc., 690 So.2d 743 (Phi. 5th DCA 1997). Section 796.09 provides a person with a civil cause of relevan cy Is broader in the discove ry concept context and a party may be of action for compensatory and punitive damages context than In the trial against anyone who coerces that person into prosti- inad- permitted to discover evidence that would be tution, who coerces that person to remain in prosti- at bid, if it would lead to the discove ry of missible tution, or who uses coercion to collect or receive ; Amente . Florida Rule of relevant evidence. Allstate any part of that person's eamingsi derived from proper Civil Procedure 1280(b)(1) delineates the prostitution. In the course of litigation under this scope of discovery: section, any transaction about which 'p plaintiff test- ifies or produces evidence does Apt subject the In General. Parties may obtain discovery regard- plaintiff to criminal prosecution or to any penalty or ing any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to whether forfeiture. In addition, any testimony or evidence or the subject matter of the pending action, any Information produced by the plaintiff or wit- party it relates to the claim or defense of the seeking discove ry or the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, Oov. Works. O 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Split&prft=HTMLE&ifm-NotSet&mt... 3/26/2009 http://web2.westlaw.com/prInt/printstrearn.aspx7sv-Th EFTA01070536  Case 9:08-cv-80119-MM Document 207-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2000_ Page 24of 46. Pm Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/2009 3 8 4o4 of nge Pap 4 703 So.2d 1076 703 So.2d 1076, 22 Pla. L. Weekly D2375,2314.L Weekly DI@ • • • (Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) ness for the plaintiffs cannot be used against the arrested. s o pain nruth perjuryfrer-- stitse one for rhne hirtning, except . --r--- Under section 796.09, the petitioner.' prior Involve- --------mrarrviTproteed ment in prostitution and their earnings born prosti- tution would be Irrelevant. Hence discovery should Section 796.09(5) specifically provides that it Is not not be permitted because such inforination would a defense that the plaintiff was paid or otherwise not be admissible at trial nor would it be reasonably compensated for prostitution, that the plaintiff had calculated to lead to evidence ultimately admissible engaged in prostitution prior to any involvement at trial. Even though the scope of discovery is gen- with the defendant or that the plaintiff made no at- erally quite broad. section 796.09 is designed to en- tempt to escape from the defendant Section courage prostitutes to sue their pimps. Thus the 796.09(6) provides that convictions for prostitution usually broad scope of discovery may be constrie- or prostitution-related offenses are inadmissible for ted so that prostitutes will not be embarrassed, har- OTC pnrpose of attacking the plaintiffs' credibility. assed or hindered in their actions. • This legislation was the result of the Florida Su- 133 Had the petitioners brought their lawsuit against preme Court Gender Bias Study Commission, Ruzzo and The Boardroom only under section which conducted an extensive investigation of pros- 796O9, evidence of petitioners' past prostitution, titution in this state. The Commission's activities including with the Boardroom, and their earnings cor- included interviews with law enforcement and relating to such activities, may not have been dis- rections personn 1 el: '1079 judges, public defende rs, rehabili tation counsel ors, social coverable. However, the petitioners filed a multi- prosecutors, drug count complaint for compensatory end punitive and workers, medical personnel, prostitutes, clients damages, alleging numerous causes of action The Commi ssion found prostitu tion to be pimps. law against the respondents. These other causes carry prevalent and uniform throughout the state and no such protection from discovery. Since the in- enforcement largely unable to deter it under pre- formation sought by discovery may be relevant or vailing social attitudes and judicial practices. The may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in often Commission further found that prostitutes are one or more of these other causes of action or to victims of economic, physical, and psychological determination of damages, we cannot': conclude that coercion, that most persons do not chose to become the trial court departed from the essential require- prostitutes, but do so to survive, and that ninety ments of law in granting this discovery. See Smith percent of street prostitutes, both adult and chil- v. 778 Bank of the Keys, 687 Sold 895 (Fla. 3d variety of dren, are controlled by pimps who use a DCA 1997) (by alleging fraud as well as breach of coercive methods to maintain this control. The contract, purchaser placed at issue her reliance on Commission determined that clients and pimps are venders' assertions, the veracity of financial docu- rarely prosecuted and, when prosecuted, receive ments she submitted to the vendor, and the state of light sentences; whereas prostitutes, who are mainly her mental health, including memory problems she females, are frequently prosecuted and receive was experiencing at the time of the alleged tedious harsher treatment in the cowls. The Commission conduct, thus deposition questions convening her recommended changes in the methods of interven- state of mind were relevant). utic, tion in prostitution from punitive to therape changes in the law to require more equal treatme nt Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. by the courts of the prostitute in relation to the cli- e to ent and the pimp and to lessen the incentiv THOMPSON, L, concurs. traffic In human flesh by giving the prostitute ac- HARRIS, J., concurs specially • with opin- cess to the judicial system without first having to be tortHARRIS, Judge, concurring specially: Cloy. Works. O 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US ifmNotSet&pat.. 3/26/2009 http://web2.westlaw.com/print/printstream.aspx7sr—Split&prft=HTMLE& EFTA01070537  • Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 207-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2009 Page 25 of 46... ... • Case 9:0B-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04102120d9 PKI1Of 8 Pag65 703 Sold 1076 0169 703 So.2d 1076, 22 Fla. L Weekly O2375, 23 Fla. L. Weekly (Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) any part of that person's earnings derived from There is a temptation in cases such as this to Inquire w , 5 po or e e, darker hue. Indeed that may ultimately be the ques- The employees resist discovery of their past prosti- tion uppermost in the Jurors' minds. But the Issue tution or their past or present earning experience on presently before us is simply whether the pot, in or- the basis of subparagraph 5 of section 796.09: der to establish the partied comparative complex- 1,5) It does not constitute a defense to a complaint ion, may discover the historical condition and the under this section that inherent characteristics of the kettle. a) The plaintiff was paid or otherwise compensated We am here involved with parties that the limited for acts of prostitution; record before us indicates were co-conspirators In a joint effort to violate Florida's laws against prosti- b) The plaintiff engaged in acts of piostitutlon pri- tution. The defendants are the owner/operators of a or to any involvement with the defendant "social club" whose primary service is prostitution; the plaintiffs am employees of the club who But the question before us Is not whether prior acts provide such services. The employees are suing the of prostitution (or the receipts of earnings there- owner/operators for, among other counts, taking ad- from) which might be revealed by answering the in- vantage of their vulnerabilities ("coercing" them to terrogatories could be used as a defeat., to the com- be prostitutes) through manipulation and exploita- plaint, but rather whether evidence of such conduct tion. In order to prepare a defense to the action, de- or such earnings would be relevant in determining fendants have filed certain interrogatories for the whether the employees were, in fact, !'coerced" into employees to answer. These interrogatories-41080 prostitution, into remaining prostitutes., or into shar- request such information as how long the employ- ing the proceeds of their services with defendants. ees have been engaged in prostitution; how the em- The relevancy of this information' depends , of con- ployees have been effected by the defendants' course, on what constitutes coercion. duct; copies of photogr aphs, movies, and video- sexu- tapes in which the employees have performed If we apply the definition of "coercion" which is al acts or simulated sexual acts; the names of previ- commonly accepted, then the relevancy of the re- a ous employers and previous rates of pay; and quested information Is apparent and this appeal has nts. statement of income received from defenda no merit at all. Webster defines "coercion" as: (1) These Interrogatories survived the employees' ob- to restrain or domina te by force, (2). to compel an jections. I agree certiorari should be denied. act or choice, or (3) to enforce or thing about by on force or threat. In sexual battery cases, the legis- The employees' primary cause of action Is based lature has adopted the common meaning of the Florida Statutes , which provide s: section 796.090X word "coercion" and has even placedlimits on it. It has provided that consent will not be recognized if (1) A person has a cause of action for compensatory submission is coerced by threats of ;force or viol- and punitive damages against ence (f the victim reasonably believe the perpetrat- - or has the present ability to execute the threaten la) A person who coerces that person into prostitu Consent also will not be recognized if submission is tion; coerced by a threat of retaliation against the victim to remain in or another If the victim reasonably believes that the '33) A person who coerces that person perpetrator has the ability to exec* the threat In prostitution, or the futurePa And in sexual battery cases, the le- gislature has vitiated what might otherwise be con- :c) A person who uses coercion to collect or receive Gov. Works. 0 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US otSct&pa... 3/26/2009 http://web2.westlaw.com/print/printstream.aspx7sw-Split&prft4ITMLE&ifm—N EFTA01070538 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 207-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2009 Page 26 of 46 Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 54-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/02/200! P6ge flif 8 Page 6 703 So.2d 1076 Weekly D169 703 Sold 1076, 22 Fla. L. Weekly D2375, 23 Fla. L. (Cite as: 703 So.2d 1076) phys- 1) Promise of greater financial rewards! Mitered as consensual if one exploits a knownjay. Me J) Promise of marriage. or her goal or takes advantage of on: who is phys- • ically helpless or involuntarily intoxicated.no lc) Restraint of Speech or communications with Therefore, oven in sexual battery cases, before co- others. ercion or exploitation will vitiate consent, the free will of the victim must be overcome by force or ;1 ) Exploitation of a condition of developmental threat or some unfortunate circumstance suffered disability, cognitive limitation, affective disorder , by the victim. or substance dependency. FP71. Section 794.011(4)(b), Florida Stet- :m) Exploitation of victimization by sexual abuse. °tea. :n) Exploitation of pornographic performance. PN2-. Section 794.011(4Xo), Florida Stat- utes. :o) Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter, safety, dr affection. P113. Section 794.011(4Xa),(d),(e), and (f). Florida Statutes. The definition urged by the employees heroin is the "promise of a greater financial rewire Whether But then we get to the definition of "coercion" con- the requested information is relevant fo the issue of tained in section 796.09(3): coercion in this case will depend on what the legis- d by subsection (I) In the meaning of n" lature intende :3) As used in this section, the term "coercio "coercion." means any practice of dominion, restraint, or in- ducement for the purpose of or with the reason- I agree with Judge Altenbemd's thodghtful analysis ably foreseeable effect of causing another person In State v. Brigham, 694 So.2d 793 (1997): to engage in or remain in prostitution or to relin- In- quish earnings derived from prostitution, and there can be no dispute that the legislature's unusu- cludes, but is not limited to: al definition of "percent" is not a common dic- tionary definition. This Is perhaps 'an appropriate ',a) Physical force or throats of physical force. case in which to remind ourselves of Learned Hand's famous observation that a "mature and de- :b) Physical or mental torture. veloped Jurisprudence" does not "make a fortress out of the dictionary." :c) Kidnapping. But even so, one would expect some nexus between 41081 (d) Blackmail. the commonly accepted meaning of ri word and the definition of that word ascribed by the legislature. ,1:e) Extortion or claims of indebtedness. If, for example, the legislature defined "canine" as including cats, although one might, Jurispruden- :f) Threats of legal complaint or report of delin- tially speaking, expect to hear a meow emanate quency. from a Great Dane, the courts should nevertheless closely examine the legislative history to see if that ig) Threat to interfere with parental rights or re- la really what the legislature Intended. The court in sponsibilities, whether by Judicial or administrat- Young v. O'Keefe, 246 town 1182, 69 N.W.2d 534, ive action or otherwise. 537 (1955), stated this principle as'. follows: "But ;h) Promise of legal benefit. 2009 Thomson Reuters/West No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. TWILE&i.fm- NOtSet&mt...