UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA¶
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON¶
JANE DOE NO. 6,¶
Plaintiff,¶
v.¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Defendant.¶
DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING THAT PLAINTIFF USE PROPER CASE STYLE IN ALL FILINGS¶
Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court for the entry of an order requiring that the Plaintiff in the above-styled action use the proper case-style in all filings in this action, as opposed to improperly including all other Jane Does, (Jane Doe No. 2, Jane Doe No. 3, Jane Doe No. 4, Jane Doe No. 5, Jane Doe No. 6, and Jane Doe No. 7), who are represented by the same counsel. Rule 10(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009), Loc. Gen. Rule 7.1 (S.D. Fla. 2009). In support of his motion, Defendant states:¶
-
- Rule 10(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, pertaining to "Caption; Names of Parties," provides that —
Every pleading must have a caption with the courts name, a title, a file number, and a Rule 7(a) designation. The title of the complaint must name all the parties; the title of other pleadings, after naming the first party on each side, may refer generally to other parties.¶
-
- Attached hereto as Exhibit A is the case style which Plaintiff recently used in filing papers with this Court. This action has not been consolidated with any of the other
Jane Doe No. 6 v. Epstein Page 2¶
Jane Doe actions filed by Plaintiffs counsel. Rule 10(a) makes clear that only the parties to this action are to be included in the caption.¶
-
By including case styles from five additional cases makes it appear as though the cases have been consolidated. Further, the case style used by Plaintiff is not only misleading, but confusing in that there is no clear delineation as to in which action the matter is properly filed. Each case has different facts and should proceed on those facts. Each Plaintiff is claiming personal injury type damages which must be decided separately.
-
Accordingly, Defendant is entitled to an order requiring that Plaintiff uses the proper caption and case style in this action and not list every case in which her counsel represents other Jane Does.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant Defendant's motion, and enter the requested order.¶
Rule 7.1 Certification¶
Pursuant to letter communication, Plaintiffs counsel did not agree with the relief request in Defendant's motion.¶
By: ROBQF> V CRITTON, JR., ESQ.
¶
Certificate of Service¶
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of May, 2009:¶
Jane Doe No. 6 v. Epstein
Page 3¶
Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq.
Adam D. Horowitz, Esq.
Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 2218
Miami, FL 33160
305-931-2200
Fax: 305-931-0877
ssm@sexabuseattorney.com
ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com
Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #6¶
Jack Alan Goldberger
Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012
561-659-8300
Fax: 561-835-8691
jagesq@bellsouth.net
Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein¶
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA¶
JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRAMME¶
Plaintiff,¶
vs.¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Defendant.¶
JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-¶
Plaintiff,¶
vs.¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Defendant.¶
JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRAMII¶
Plaintiff,¶
vs.¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Defendant.¶
JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON¶
Plaintiff,¶
vs.¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Defendant.¶
" EXHIBIT¶
JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRABOHNSON¶
Plaintiff, vs.¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Defendant.¶
JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRAUM¶
Plaintiff, vs.¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Defendant.¶
PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY AND OR CONTINUE ACTION¶
Plaintiffs, JANE DOES 2-7, by and through undersigned counsel, file this Memorandum in Opposition to Stay and or Continue Action, as follows:¶
I. Introduction¶
In moving for stay, Defendant has the burden of demonstrating that, due to a parallel criminal proceeding, if he exercises his right against self incrimination he will certainly lose on summary judgment unless a stay is granted. Defendant has failed to satisfy this burden. There is no pending motion for summary judgment. There is also no criminal proceeding at this time arising from Epstein's acts against the Plaintiffs or other victims. Indeed, whether such a criminal proceeding is ever commenced is entirely within the Defendant's control, by complying with the terms of his Non-Prosecution Agreement with the U.S. Attorney's Office. Defendant relies upon an amorphous¶