568.pdf

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ____________________________________/ Related cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 ____________________________________/ ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant’s Emergency Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Quash and Motion for Attorney’s Fees filed June 14, 2010 (D.E. #565). Having reviewed the pleadings filed incident to this matter and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Emergency Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Quash and Motion for Attorney’s Fees, filed June 14, 2010 (D.E. #565) is DENIED for failure to comply with Local Rule 26.1.H.1 in that the Motion was filed outside the thirty (30) day time limit provided for under the Rule. Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 568 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/15/2010 Page 1 of 3 2 By this Motion, filed today, June 14, 2010, Defendant seeks to prevent the taking of a deposition scheduled to take place less than 24 hours from now, tomorrow June 15, 2010. Local Rule 26.H.1, S.D. Fla. L.R., provides that all motions related to discovery “shall” be filed within 30 days from the date of the occurrence of the grounds giving rise to the motion. Id. “Failure to file [a] discovery motion within thirty days, absent a showing of reasonable cause for a later filing, may constitute a waiver of the relief sought.” Id. In the instant case, the deposition Epstein is seeking to quash, that of Ms. Maritza Milagros Vasquez, was first noticed by Plaintiff’s attorney in the related but not consolidated case of C.L. v. Jeffrey Epstein, 10-80447-CIV-MARRA on April 20, 2010, and later cross-noticed via e-mail by Plaintiff’s attorney in this case, Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, 08-80119-CIV- MARRA on May 12, 2010. Whether viewing the 30-day time clock as beginning to run on April 20, 2010 with C.L.’s Notice, or the more likely start date of May 12, 2010 with Jane Doe’s Cross-Notice, the fact remains the Emergency Motion filed today, just a day before the deposition is scheduled to take place, is outside the 30-day time limit imposed by Local Rule 26.H.1. Under these circumstances where the Notice and Cross-Notice were served over thirty days ago and the Emergency Motion is filed at the eleventh hour, not even a full 24 hours before the scheduled deposition is set to take place, the burden is on the Defendant to show good cause for his failure to file within the time proscribed by Local Rule 26.H.1. In this regard no effort was even made by Defendant in an attempt to show good cause, let alone proven. Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion is denied. DONE AND ORDERED this June 15, 2010, in Chambers, at West Palm Beach, Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 568 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/15/2010 Page 2 of 3 3 Florida. LINNEA R. JOHNSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE CC:The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 568 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/15/2010 Page 3 of 3