HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013375.jpg
1.72 MB
Extraction Summary
4
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / motion for summary judgment (page 6)
File Size:
1.72 MB
Summary
This document is page 6 of a legal motion for summary judgment filed by a defendant named Edwards against claims made by Epstein. The text argues that Epstein's allegations linking Edwards to a Ponzi scheme run by Scott Rothstein are baseless and unsupported by evidence. It mentions that Edwards has provided sworn testimony and a deposition denying any knowledge of the fraud, and a footnote notes that Epstein has already dismissed claims against another defendant identified as L.M.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | Plaintiff |
Filed claims against Edwards and Scott Rothstein; allegations involve a Ponzi scheme.
|
| Edwards | Defendant |
Accused by Epstein of involvement in Rothstein's Ponzi scheme; moving for summary judgment to dismiss claims.
|
| Scott Rothstein | Third Party / Perpetrator |
Ran a 'Ponzi Scheme'; Epstein has claims against him.
|
| L.M. | Former Defendant |
The only other defendant named in the suit; Epstein dismissed all claims against this person.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Florida Second District Court of Appeal |
Cited in case law (Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App.).
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Source of document (indicated by Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Unknown
Scott Rothstein's Ponzi Scheme
Florida (implied)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied jurisdiction based on case law citations.
|
Relationships (3)
Epstein filed suit against Edwards; Edwards is seeking summary judgment against Epstein.
Epstein alleges Edwards was involved in Rothstein's Ponzi scheme; Edwards denies knowledge or involvement.
Key Quotes (5)
"Epstein’s Claim Regarding Edwards Have Absolutely No Factual Basis."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013375.jpg
Quote #1
"The bulk of Epstein’s claims against Edwards hinge on the premise that Edwards was involved in a Ponzi scheme run by Scott Rothstein."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013375.jpg
Quote #2
"Edwards was simply not involved in any Ponzi scheme."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013375.jpg
Quote #3
"As his deposition makes crystal clear, he had no knowledge of any fraudulent activity in which Scott Rothstein may have been"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013375.jpg
Quote #4
"Epstein has already chosen to dismiss all of his claims against L.M., the only other defendant named in the suit."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013375.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,982 characters)
present evidence rebutting the motion for summary judgment and there is no genuine issue of
material fact, then entry of judgment is proper as a matter of law. See Davis v. Hathaway, 408
So. 2d 688, 689 (Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App. 1982); see also Holl, 191 So. 2d at 43.
material fact, then entry of judgment is proper as a matter of law. See Davis v. Hathaway, 408
So. 2d 688, 689 (Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App. 1982); see also Holl, 191 So. 2d at 43.
B. Epstein's Claim Regarding Edwards Have Absolutely No Factual Basis.
This is not a complicated case for granting summary judgment. To the contrary, this is a
simple case for summary judgment because each and every one of Epstein's claim against
Edwards lacks any merit whatsoever.¹
simple case for summary judgment because each and every one of Epstein's claim against
Edwards lacks any merit whatsoever.¹
1. Epstein's allegations regarding Edwards' involvement in Rothstein's "Ponzi
Scheme" are unsupported and unsupportable because he was simply not
involved in any such scheme.
Scheme" are unsupported and unsupportable because he was simply not
involved in any such scheme.
a. Edwards Had No Involvement in the Ponzi Scheme.
The bulk of Epstein's claims against Edwards hinge on the premise that Edwards was
involved in a Ponzi scheme run by Scott Rothstein. Broad allegations of wrongdoing on the part
of Edwards are scattered willy-nilly throughout the complaint. None of the allegations provide
any substance as to how Edwards actually assisted the Ponzi scheme, and allegations that he
"knew or should have known" of its existence are based upon an impermissible pyramiding of
inferences. In any event, these allegations all fail for one straightforward reason: Edwards was
simply not involved in any Ponzi scheme. He has provided sworn testimony and an affidavit in
support of that assertion, and there is not (and could never be) any contrary evidence.
involved in a Ponzi scheme run by Scott Rothstein. Broad allegations of wrongdoing on the part
of Edwards are scattered willy-nilly throughout the complaint. None of the allegations provide
any substance as to how Edwards actually assisted the Ponzi scheme, and allegations that he
"knew or should have known" of its existence are based upon an impermissible pyramiding of
inferences. In any event, these allegations all fail for one straightforward reason: Edwards was
simply not involved in any Ponzi scheme. He has provided sworn testimony and an affidavit in
support of that assertion, and there is not (and could never be) any contrary evidence.
Edwards has now been deposed at length in this case. As his deposition makes crystal
clear, he had no knowledge of any fraudulent activity in which Scott Rothstein may have been
clear, he had no knowledge of any fraudulent activity in which Scott Rothstein may have been
¹ A decision by the Court to grant summary judgment on Epstein's claims against Edwards would not affect
Epstein's claims against Scott Rothstein. Epstein has already chosen to dismiss all of his claims against L.M., the
only other defendant named in the suit.
6
Epstein's claims against Scott Rothstein. Epstein has already chosen to dismiss all of his claims against L.M., the
only other defendant named in the suit.
6
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013375
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document