| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
C.M.A.
|
Client |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
C.M.A.
|
Counsel for plaintiff |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
C.M.A.
|
Counsel for |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
C.M.A.
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
CMA
|
Client |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-09-17 | N/A | Deposition scheduled but canceled due to an incident involving Jeffrey Epstein and the plaintiff. | Florida Science Foundation ... | View |
| 2009-05-20 | N/A | Filing of Plaintiff's Notice of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2009-05-20 | N/A | Plaintiff C.M.A. filed Notice of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections. | Southern District of Florida | View |
This document is a legal motion filed on November 9, 2009, by third-party witness Igor Zinoviev, requesting a protective order to prevent his deposition in the case Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. Zinoviev, who worked as a driver and bodyguard for Epstein since November 2005, argues he has no relevant information for the civil cases as his employment began after the alleged events and he never discussed the criminal or civil cases with Epstein.
This document is a 'Notice of Compliance' filed on July 28, 2009, by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It pertains to multiple civil cases filed by 'Jane Doe' plaintiffs against Epstein. The filing states that while the court ordered the parties to agree on a preservation of evidence order, they were unable to reach a full agreement, leading Epstein to submit his own proposed order. The document includes a comprehensive service list detailing the attorneys representing the various plaintiffs and defendants, including Sarah Kellen.
This document is a Motion to Reschedule Hearing filed on May 29, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Attorney Robert C. Josefsberg, representing Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and 102, requests to move a hearing scheduled for June 12, 2009, because he will be attending his 50th College Reunion in Hanover, New Hampshire. The document includes a comprehensive service list detailing the legal teams associated with Jeffrey Epstein, Sarah Kellen, and various plaintiffs in related cases.
This document is a legal reply filed on May 29, 2009, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 against Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiffs argue for the right to proceed anonymously, citing fears of harassment, public humiliation, and Epstein's alleged intent to intimidate victims by exposing their identities. The document lists numerous related cases and provides a service list of attorneys representing various parties, including Bruce Reinhart representing co-defendant Sarah Kellen.
This document is a 'Notice of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections' filed on May 20, 2009, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Plaintiff C.M.A. withdraws her objections to Jeffrey Epstein's motion to compel her to identify herself by her legal name in the case style and third-party subpoenas, though she maintains her objection to the case being dismissed sua sponte. The document lists numerous related cases involving Jane Doe plaintiffs and provides a service list of attorneys involved.
This document is a 'Notice of Striking Docket Entry' filed on May 4, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, case Jane Doe No. 101 v. Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiff's counsel, Katherine W. Ezell of Podhurst Orseck, P.A., notifies the court that a previous docket entry was filed without a signature and has been re-filed correctly. The document includes a Certificate of Service listing numerous attorneys involved in this case and related cases against Epstein, including Bruce Reinhart (defense), Jack Scarola, and Brad Edwards.
This document is a legal response filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe 101 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on May 1, 2009. The plaintiff agrees to the court's order to consolidate ten separate cases filed by various Jane Does and C.M.A. against Jeffrey Epstein for the purposes of discovery. The document includes a service list detailing the contact information for attorneys representing the various plaintiffs and the defendant.
This document is a Plaintiff's Notice of Serving Second Amended Answers to Interrogatories in a 2009 civil case against Jeffrey Epstein in the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiff, whose name is redacted, details her residence history and her interactions with Epstein between 2002 and 2003, stating she visited his Florida home roughly twice a week to provide massages after being introduced by a friend. The document reveals she recruited other females for Epstein in exchange for payment, used drugs (Morning Glory, Angel Trumpets, cocaine, marijuana) during the relevant period, and lists various legal counsel and law enforcement entities involved in the investigation.
This document is a partial transcript from a court proceeding on September 17, 2009, detailing the cancellation of a deposition involving Jeffrey Epstein. The deposition was called off because Jeffrey Epstein made face-to-face contact with the plaintiff, Jane Doe 4, which her counsel, Adam Horowitz, stated intimidated her and violated a prior stipulation that Epstein would not be present. Defense counsel, Robert Critton, argued that Epstein was instructed to leave the building and planned to appear via Skype, and that the encounter would not have happened if the plaintiff and her counsel had arrived on time.
This document is a page from a court filing, Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, dated September 17, 2009, listing multiple attorneys and their respective law firms, contact information, and the specific related cases they represent plaintiffs in. It details legal counsel for various plaintiffs, including 'Jane Doe' and 'C.M.A.', across several related case numbers, providing contact details for each attorney and their firm.
This is a court filing from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, dated October 28, 2009. Attorneys Jack Scarola and Jack P. Hill, representing an unnamed (redacted) Plaintiff, filed a notice confirming they served 'Second Amended Answers to Interrogatories' to the defendants, Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen. The document notes that the original interrogatories were propounded by Epstein on January 16, 2009. It is marked as Defendant's Exhibit C-9 in a later criminal case (20 Cr. 330).
This legal document is a 'Notice of Serving Answers to Interrogatories' filed in the Southern District of Florida on February 18, 2009. It certifies that the Plaintiff (whose name is redacted) has provided answers to questions (interrogatories) previously asked by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein on January 16, 2009. The document lists Sarah Kellen as a co-defendant and was prepared by attorney Jack Scarola of the firm Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. The document was later used as Defendant's Exhibit C-8 in the criminal trial S2 20 Cr. 330 (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell).
Filing of the response document via CM/ECF.
Filing via CM/ECF system
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity