EFTA00222183.pdf

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 95 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, 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: 1. 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 court's 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. 2. 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 EFTA00222183 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 95 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 2 of 5 Doe 2 v. Epsteln 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. 3. By inciuding 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 Geer 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 daiming personal injury type damages which must be decided separately. 4. 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. Robert D. Cr to Jr Attomey for Eps ein 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 I day of May, 2009: Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South EFTA00222184 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 95 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 3 of 5 Doe 2 v. Epstein Page 3 Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ahorowitzehermanlaw.com jhermanehermanlaw.com Iriveraehermanlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #2 Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jauesnebellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Respectfully sub1 itted, By: ROBE- CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida No 224162 rcritabdclaw.co MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeebdclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-842-2820 Fax: 561-515-3148 (Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00222185 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 95 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 4 of 5 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 82 Entered on FLSD Doc.,et 04/23/2009 Page 1 of 9 UNTIED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintig vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRATJOHNSON Plaintiff vs. 3th,REY EPS ON, Defendant JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, VS. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant - 1 - 4 EXHIBIT ft EFTA00222186 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 95 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 5 of 5 Case 9:08-cv-8011 9-KAM Document 82 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2009 Page 2 of 9 JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRAJJOIDISON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY AND OR CONTINUE AC noN 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 -2- EFTA00222187