Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch1_p00484.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1320-18 Filed 01/03/24 Page 37 of 40 requestor’s case, or to some significant aspect of the case. Zirkelbach Const. Inc. v. Rajan, 93 So.3d 1124, 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). “[W]ell established in Florida is the principle that the unsworn analysis of a party’s attorney and/or a bare assertion of need and undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent [is] insufficient to satisfy this showing.” Butler v. Harter, 152 So.3d 705, 712 (Fla. lst DCA, 2014); see Procter & Gamble Co. v. Swilley, 462 So.2d 1188, 1194 (Fla. lst DCA 1985); State v. T.A., 528 So.2d 974, 975 (Fla. 2d DCA, 1988) (‘[R]epresentations by counsel not made under oath and not subject to cross-examination, absent a stipulation, are not evidence). Further, Florida courts have held that “the showing of need encompasses a showing of diligence by the party seeking discovery of another party’s work product.” Butler v. Harter, 152 So.3d 705, 712 (Fla. lst DCA, 2014); see also CSX Transp., Inc. v. Carpenter, 725 So.2d 434, 435 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (quashing order granting motion to compel discovery because the record did not contain affidavits supporting plaintiff's argument that it was unable to obtain the substantially equivalent information by other means without undue hardship); Falco v. N. Shore Labs. Corp., 866 So.2d 1255, 1257 (Fla. lst DCA 2004) (holding that need and undue hardship “must be demonstrated by affidavit or sworn testimony”); N. Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Button, 592 So.2d 367, 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), (“[T]he unsworn assertions of plaintiff's counsel were insufficient to constitute a showing of need and undue hardship.”), called into doubt on other grounds as stated in Columbia Hosp. Corp. of S. Broward v. Fain, 16 So.3d 236 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). Here, Defendant has ample information from which she can present her case. At the core of this case is whether Ms. Giuffre “lied” when she said that the Defendant recruited her to be sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein. Defendant can, of course, testify to her interactions with Ms. Giuffre, as well as call other witnesses regarding the circumstances of those interactions. 30