IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, J. , individually, Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff. CASE NO.: 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG JUDGE: 1-1AFELE #### PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT/COUNTER-MOTION TO EXPAND NUMBER OF INTERROGATOR! PLAINTIFF Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), by and through his a undersigned counsel and pursuant % t ules 1.340 and 1.280 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby files his o • n Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff a ") Motion to E umber of Interrogatories' as follows: # INTRODUCTION This was rst set for trial through the trial period commencing October 18, 2011 I a ce with this Court's Order setting Trial, Epstein filed his Trial Witness x 'bit List on or about June 24, 2013. Before trial, this Court granted Summary Judgment in favor of Epstein as to both counts of la Complaint against him for Abuse of Process and Malicious Prosecution. This Court's ruling as to the Malicious ^' While erroneously slates in his Motion that he may only serve 25 Interrogatories without leave of Court, the 1988 amendment to Rule 1.340 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure increased the number of permitted interrogatories to 30, including all subparts. Prosecution count had been on appeal since that time, but this Court again had this matter set for trial in the fall of 2016. Pursuant to that Order Setting Trial, Epstein filed his Trial Witness List and Exhibit List, which was nearly identical to the one he filed in June 2013, on August 8, 2016. After Epstein served his August 8, 2016 Trial Witness List and Exhibit List, M served Interrogatories upon Epstein, to which Epstein obj cted on two grounds: first, as exceeding the permitted number permitted by law witil ave of court, and second, as impermissible as a matter of law. On May 25, 2017, filed a Motion to Expand Intefrogatories and attached thereto two (2) sets of Interrogatories, alleging thereiniNtha e use of written interrogatories is the least burdensome, least expen ' S c.most expeditious discovery means available to the Defendant by which to Alsn, essary information and narrow trial issues," and that "[t]he Plaintiff wil 'i t judiced through the granting of this motion." See Edwards's Motion 'bits, attached hereto as Exhibit A. As demonstrated in detail belo tting to expand his Interrogatories is impermissible and objecti ' motion should be denied.2. ## MEMORANDUM OF LAW "It is ell settled that the scope and limitation of discovery falls within the broad discreti., o e rial court." Cordis Corp. v. O'Shea, 988 So. 2d 1163, 1165 (Fla. 4th However, interrogatories are not intended to be used for "exploring all minut details of a controversy." Cabrera v. , 322 So. 2d 559, 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Most importantly, it is axiomatic that "one party is not entitled to prepare his case ² By filing this Opposition, Epstein does not waive any right to assert any legal objections to the substance of the Interrogatories or request an order of protection as to any of the discovery requested, should the • Court permit same. through the investigative work product of his adversary when the same or similar information is available through ordinary investigative techniques and discovery procedures." Dodson v. Persell, 390 So.2d 704, 708 (Fla. 1980). See also= by & through Adult Comprehensive Protective Services, Inc. v. Polies, 872 So. 2d 272, 274 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (interrogatory asking plaintiffs to identify each document or item they might offer as evidence at trial was overbroad and improperly sought information protected by work-product privilege). The case at bench has been pending since 2009, and th tee have engaged in exhaustive discovery throughout that time. Nevertheless, w seeks permission from the court to require Epstein to do his job for WM really, is asking this Court to permit him to serve Epstein with t following Interrogatories: "As to every individual identified on Je ein's List of Trial Witnesses, state the following: - 1. Each contested Ctua ue expected to be addressed by the witness; - 2. A detailed description of the testimony expected to be presented at trial by the witness as to each contested factual issue; - 3. A description of the Trial Exhibit List number of each exhibit expected to be introduced into evidence by the witness; - 4. A description of the Trial Exhibit List number of each exhibit introduced through other means which the witness is expected to testify about, together with a description of the witness' expected testimony regarding each exhibit." See Exhibit A. (First Additional Set of Interrogatories attached to Motion). As this Court is aware, M' list of trial witnesses improperly identifies intended witnesses by categories, rather than providing specific witnesses identified by their proper names. The vague and deliberately uninformative categories uses in his witness list, include "anyone named in any deposition or discovery responses; all victims identified in the local, state and federal investigations; all attorneys who have prosecuted claims against Jeffrey Epstein on behalf of other victims; all other named victims; all persons referenced ina' Motion for Summary Judgment.3 Epstein, on the other hand, filed a witness list separate cifically identifying seventy-four (74) individual witnesses by name. Altholig Ed yards does not specify any subparts to his interrogatories, and on the fa \$tilehe only appears to make four (4) requests, is, in fact, making Ajsla i e separate detailed requests about each of Epstein's seventy-four (74) ic't " ses. a has known the identity these witnesses since at least 20 E pstein filed his first witness list, and accordingly this request is impermi • le. Slatnick v. Leadership Housing Systems of Florida, Inc., 368 So. 2d 78 (F A 1979) (stating in response to one interrogatory that "this question alone, lati a to 18 condominium buildings, might take a week to answer. It is difficult to imagine how the author of these particular interrogatories could have possiblteonjured up a more oppressive and burdensome collection."); Greyhound Lines, Ii on, 445 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). ext, Interrogatories undeniably seek Epstein's protected work produt.'i. In Surf Drugs, Inc. v. Vermette, 236 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 1970), the Florida Supreme MEI list of trial witnesses fails to comport with the applicable Rules as well as the Court's Order in that it fails t names or addresses of any of the alleged t in the vaults categories provided by and despite specific requests by Epstein for to do so, has failed to rectify this issue since 2013. This violation is the subject of a separate Motion that is still pending before this Court. Court provided this general definition of what constitutes work product: "personal views of the attorney as to how and when to present evidence, his evaluation of its relative importance, his knowledge of which witness will give certain testimony . . . come within the general category of work product." Id. at 112 (emphasis added). See also FLA. R.Civ. P. 1.280(6)(2); Southern Bell TeL & TeL Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 1994). In his Interrogatories, requests that Epstein provide f Epstein's separately named witnesses "a detailed description of the t pected to be presented at trial by the witness as to each contested fac \<' , a description of the Trial Exhibit List number of each exhibit expected tt t ) uced into evidence by the witness; a description of the Trial Exhibit List c em ' IN, each exhibit introduced through other means which the witness is expec iii'es i about, together with a description of the witness' expected testimony g each exhibit." See Exhibit A. These Interrogatories are, unqucstio 1 anding protected work product as defined by the Florida Supreme Court. V 36 So. 2d at 112. "The rationale supporting the work product doctrine is that 'one party is not entitled to prepare his case through the investigative work product of his adversary where the same or similar information is avail ble through ordinary investigative techniques and discovery procedures.'" Air a Servs., Inc. v. Bohla, 155 So. 3d 1272, 1274-75 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (citing S. Bel el. & Tel. Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377, 1384 (Fla. 1994) (emphasis added)). Finally, the second set of Interrogatories attached to Motion impermissibly seek Net Worth Discovery from Epstein; discovery about which the parties have already extensively litigated, and to which Epstein already provided responses on July 10, 2013°. .A true and correct copy of the Interrogatories, as well as the certificate of service for the answers to same, is attached hereto as composite "Exhibit Consequently, and for all of the reasons set forth above, Motion is improper and should be denied. WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the served upon all parties listed below, via Electronic Service, this June /s/ Tonja Haddad Col tan Tonja Haddad Colemari, B Ha. Bar No.: 0176737 LAW OFFICES OF TONJA HADDAD, PA 315 SE 7th Street Suite 301 Fon Lauderdale, Florida 33301 A54.467.1223 K Efiling@tonjahaddad.com iri) 364337.3716 (facsimile) nja@tonjahaddad.com ⁴ Epstein does not waive any right to assert any substantive legal objections or request an order of protection as to any of the discovery requested, should the Court permit same. ### SERVICE LIST CASE NO. 502009CA040800XVOCMBAG Jack Scarola, Esq. jsx@searcylaw.com; mep@searcylaw.com Searcy Denney Scarola et al. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Jack Goldberger, Esq. jgoldberger@agwpa.com; smahoney@agwpa.com Atterbury, Goldberger, & Weiss, PA CIA 250 Australian Ave. South West Palm Beach, FL 3340I Suite Mar ^I ^cN Burik, Esq. Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 East roward Blvd. Suite 700 1.( 4A) P9 J. ME Esq. brad r atlitojustice.com Jaffe Weissing Fistos Lch 425 N Andrews Avenue Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 "Ccia.v Fred Haddad, Esq. Dee@Fred HaddadLaw.com 315 SE 76 Street, Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 3 301 Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esquire Tonja@tonjahaddad.com; etiling@tonjahaddad.com Law Offices of Tonja Haddad, P.A. 315 SE 7th Street, Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein W. Chester a Jr. One Clearlake Center Suite 1400 250 Australian Avenue South \\Vest Palm Beach, Florida 33401 wcblaw@aol.com; wcbeg@aol.com # FACT WITNESS INTERROGATORIES TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN As to every individual identified on Jeffrey Epstein's List of Trial Witnesses, state the following: - I. Each contested factual issue expected to be addressed by the witness; ANSWER: - 2. A detailed description of the testimony expected to be presented at trial by the witness as to each contested factual issue; ANSWER: - 3. A description of the Trial Exhi ist nittnber 44c of each exhibit expected to be introduced into evidence by the witness; ANSWER: - 4. A\O⁴ niec) day of who is personally known to identification and who did/did not (SEAL) (Notary signature) (Notary name - print) NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida (Serial number, if any) # NET WORTH NTERROCATORIES TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN - 1. What is your full name? - 2. How are you currently employed? pes 3. State the amount of your current salary and describe all additional benefits of employment including bonuses, allowances, pension and profit sharing participations, options, deferred compensation, insurance benefits and other prerequisites of your employment including the dollar amount or dollar value of eA during the twelve months preceding your receipt of these interrogatories. 1. If you own or have any beneficial interest in any stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or other securities of any class in any government, governmental organization, company, firm or corporation, whether foreign or domestic, please state: - (a) The name and address of the entity in which you own or have any beneficial propriety or security interest of any sort; - (b) The serial number of each bond, share, certificate or other evidence of ownership or security; - (c) The current fair market value of each such interest; kⁱfli (d) The manner in which such valueSc ulated. A^c iS( / 5. As to each federal income tax return filed by you or on your behalf for the years ²⁰¹¹through and including 2016, identify as specifically as identified in your tax return the source of all reported income and the separate amounts derived from each source K O^r each parcel of real property in which you hold any interest, state: - (a) The address, - (b) The legal description of the property; - (c) The assessed value of the property for trot ^p '49 - (d) The date and price of ^a - (c) Whethe , , and at what amount the property has been appraised since the time of purchase; Whether, when, and at what price the property has been offered for sale since the time of purchase; - (g) The name and address of each real estate agent with whom the property has been listed for sale since the time of purchase; - (h) The cost of any improvements made to the property, cy sit urchase; The nature of your interest in 42 7. List each item and state the estimated value of all personal property in which you have an interest which personal property was acquired at a cost in excess of \$5,000 or which personal property has an estimated present value in excess of \$5,000, and as to each state: - The date of acquisition; - (b) The cost of acquisition; - (c) The current estimated fair market value; - (d) The manner in which the fair market value 8. If any of the real or personal pro ed by you, either individually, jointly or otherwise, is encumbered by either areal estate mortgage, chattel mortgage, or any other type of lien, then for each item of property, state adescription of the nature and amount of the encumbrance, the date the encumbrance arose, whether the encumbrance is evidenced by any written document and, if so, a descriptiontf that document. - 9. have an ownership interest in any businesses, for each business state: AO) - (a) The name and address of the business; I f - (b) The present book value and the present market value of your interest in the business, and its percentage of the total value of the business; - (c) A description of the manner in which the stated Fair market value was calculated. 10. Identify all banks, credit union and:vin\\ti ^gCd loan accounts, in which you have an interest or right of withdrawal and for each ace sit nt state: - "ko; ,(1qCia." - (a) Where account is located; - (b) The highest and lowest balance in the account during the 40 day period immediately preceding your receipt of these interrogatories. 'p Case No.: 502009CA040800XraMBAG Notice of Serving Net Worth Interrogatories 11. Identify all other assets of avalue in excess of \$5,000 which assets were not previously identified and as to each state: - (a) The date of acquisition; - (b) The cost of acquisition; - (c) The current estimated fair market value; \\zt 04 The means utilized to estimate the current fair market value. 12. Identify all other liabilities not previously identified and as to each state: Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Notice of Serving Net Worth Interrogatories - (a) The date the liability arose; - (b) The amount of the liability at inception; - (c) The terms of repayment or sad - (d) The current,,14)/ C.) balance. Cos - 13. State your year end net worth for each of the past 5 years and your best estimate of Ota r present net worth. Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Notice of Serving Net Worth Interrogatories STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this.stay of ²⁰, by, who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did did/ not take an oath. (SEAL) (Notary signature) (Notary, name - print) NOTARY PUBLIC, State of (Serial number, if any) JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA vs. CASE NO.502009CA040800XXXXMBAG J, Individually, and L.M., individually. Defendants. ### JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S NOTICE OF SERVING UNVERIFIED AMENDED ANSWERS TO DEFENDANT I iTERROGATORIES Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein, by and through his undersign co 1 and pursuant to Rule 1.340 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, hen s ~ttl• that the original amended answers to Defendant's Interrogatories was s AI Defendant via electronic service this July 10, 2013. +6s /s/ Tonja Haddad Coleman Tonja Haddad Coleman, Esq. Fla. Bar No.: 0176737 LAW OFFICES OF TON1A HADDAD, PA 315 SE 7th Street Suite 301 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 954.467.1223 954.337.3716 (facsimile) Tonja@tonjahaddad.com