758.pdf

NOT A CERTIFIED COPY JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, V. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendants, Electronically Filed 10/10/2013 04:36:02 PM ET IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE I 5TII JCDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JOl~T PRETRIAL STIPULATION Pursuant to this Court's Order Setting Jury lrial and Directing Pretrial and Mediation Procedures, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and Defendant/Counter- Plaintiff Bradley Edwards ("Edwards") hereby submit this Joint Pretrial Stipulation. 1. List of All Pending Motions: a. Edwards' Motion to Determine Entitlement to Adverse lnference and Precluding Epstein from Offering Evicleucc at Trial; b. Epstein's Motion to Quash Edwards's Subpoenas Duces Tecum and for Sanctions; c. Epstein's Motion for Summary Judgment. d. Epstein's Motion in Liminc. e. Edwards' Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Edwards adv. Epstein Case No. 502009CA040800X.X:XXMBAG Pretrial Stipulation Page 2 2. Stipulated Facts: None. 3. Statement of Issues of Fact for Determination at Trial: a. Plaintiff contends that the following arc issues of fact for determination at trial: l. Whether Epstein had probable cause to bring suit against Edwards for the claims brought by him; 2. Did Epstein maliciously and improperly set in motion a chain of events that lead to the initiation of a judicial proceeding against Edwards? 3. Whether Epstein sued Edwards maliciously; 4. Whether Epstein continued the prosecution of the claims against Edwards out of malice and for the ulterior motive of attempting to extort Edwards; 5. Whether Epstein engaged in an illegal, improper, or perverted use of the judicial process by his actions in the case he pursued against Edwards; 6. Whether and to what extent Edwards has been damaged m the past and will continue to be damaged in the future; 7. Whether and in what amount it is appropriate to impose punitive damages against Epstein b. Defendant contends that the following are issues of fact for determination at trial: 1. Epstein agrees that Edwards must prove cach and every one of the issues listed above. NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Edwards adv. Epstein Case No. 502009CA040800XXXX~1BAG Pretrial Stipulation Page 3 2. Whether Edwards has overcome the litigation privilege. 3. Each and every allegation in Edwards's Complaint. 4. Exhibit Lists (with Objections): Plaintiffs Exhibit List is attnchcd as Exhibit A Defendant's Exhibit List is attached ao; Exhibit B 5. Witness Lists: Plaintiff's Witness List is attached as Exhibit A Defendant" s Witness List is attached as Exhibit R 6. Estimated Trial Time: 12 trial days 7. Names, Addresses, and Telephone Numbers of Attorneys to Try the Case: For Plaintiff: Jack Scarola, Esquire Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 213 9 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL33409 Phone: (561) 686-6300 Fax: (561) 383-9451 NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Edwards adv. Epsh:in Case ~o. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Pretrial Stipulation Page 4 8. For Defendant: Fred Haddad, Esq. Dec@Fre<lIIaddadLaw.com 1 Financial Plaza Suite 2612 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 954,467.6767 Jack Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com; smahoney@agwpa.com Atterbury, Goldberger, & Weiss, PA 25 0 Australian Ave. South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esquire tonja@tonjahaddad.com; Dehbie@Tonjahaddad.com Tonja Haddad, P.A. 3 I 5 SE 7th Street, Suite 3 0 l Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: (954 )-467-1223 Fax: (954)-337-3716 Number of Peremptory Challenges Per Party: ,., ., NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Edwards adv. Epstein Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Pretrial Stipulation Page 5 9. Short, Plain Statement of the Case Which \\''ill Be Read to the Jury: Edwards' Proposed Statement: Jeffrey Epstein was criminally accused of engaging in illicit sexual activity with multiple under-aged females. More than 20 persons alleging to be victin1s of Epstein's 1.:rimes brought civil suits against Epstein. Several of those persons were represented by Attorney Bradley Edwards. While the claims on behalf of those persons were being prosecuted hy Edwards, it was publicly disclosed that the senior partner in the law finn that employed Edwards, Scott Rothstein, had conducted a fraudulent scheme which, in paii. had used the claims against Epstein to induce investors to buy interests in non-existent settlements. Rothstein' s scheme raised hundreds of millions of dollars and was one of the largest frauds in U.S. history. After the Rothstein scheme unraveled and the fraud was publicly disclosed, Epstein went to his attorneys and arranged for a lawsuit to be filed against Edwards. Epstein's attorneys then filed suit against Edwards alleging that he was a knowing participant in Rothstein's fraud. Epstein later settled the claims being prosecuted by Edwards on his client's behalf, but Edwards continued to pursue an action challenging the plea deal Epstein struck with the Federal government. Bradley Edwards defended against Epstein's lawsuit, challenging it on the grounds that it had no legal or factual support. Shortly before the Cou11 was scheduled to rule on Mr. Edwards' challenge, Epstein dropped all of his claims against Edwards. Bradley Edwards has now sued NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Edwards adv. Epste1n Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Pretrial Stipulation Page6 Jeffrey Epstein alleging that the sole reason for Epstein's lawsuit was an attempt to intimidate Edwards into abandoning or compromising his clients' interests. Epstein's Proposed Statement: Jeffrey Epstein was a Defendant in thret: civil suits in which Bradley Edwards was the prosecuting attorney. During the time that the litigation was pending, Edwards became a partner at the law finn of Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler (RRA), which was a front for the largest Ponzi scheme in South Florida history. The cases against Epstein that were being prosecuted by Edwards while he was a pai1ner at RRA were used to further the Ponzi scheme and defraud investors of millions of dollars. Edwards's partner at R.RA and the Co-Defendant in this case, Scott Rothstein, plead guilty and is serving fifty (50) years in prison. The inve~1igation into the RR/\ Ponzi scheme is still ongoing. Epstein. learning of the use of hi::; cases in the Pon7j scheme, reviewing what had transpired in the litigations against him during the time frame during which his cases were prosecuted by RRA, and reading about the several other lawsuits filed against RR.A for the Ponzi scheme that included the use of his cases, filed suit against Edwards and his partner Rothstein. Edwards immediately filed his Counterclaim for Abuse of Process and Malicious Prosecution. Epstein has temporarily dismissed his case against Edwards because of the difficulty he was having gathering discovery and other inforn1ation to prove his case due to adverse rulings from the Court regarding Jiscuvery, the inability to get documents from the Trustee for RRA, and the ongoing federal investigation into RR.A and th1:; Ponzi scheme. NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Edwards adv. Epstein Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Pretrial Stipulation Page 7 10. Detailed List of All Agreements and Stipulations that May Affect the Trial: None 11. Certification of Counsel: Each of the attorneys who will try the case have read the Order Setting Trial and and have ful