EFTA02729648

06-04-'09 15:16 FROM-THOMAS & UXICER0 8139843070 T-995 F001/023 F-849
THOMAS IOCICFRO
BRALOW
400 N. Ashley Driveo$Uite I I00•Tampa. FL 33602
813.984.3060 (Phone)s8I3-984-3070 (Fax)
Toll Free: 866-395-7100
facsimile transmittal
To: R. Alexander Acosta, Esq. Fax: (561) 820-8777
Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq. (561)355-7351
Michael McAuliffe, Esq.
Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. (561) 835-8691
Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. (954) 527.8663
William J. Berger, Esq.
From: Deanna K. Shullman, Esq. Date: 06/04/2009
Re: State v. J. Epstein Pages: 6
Cc: Marilyn Judicial Assistant to Judge 561.355-1616
Colbath
Urgent O For review n Please comment-O Please reply Please recycle fl
Please see attached Motion to Intervene and Petition for Access
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMCNT
This eketrome message transmission contains infommicti from the law form of Thomas, Latices* & &Maw PL and is ocelideetial or
omitted. The information is minded to he foe the we of the individual or entity named *ova. If you se not the intended recipes. be aware
that any disclosure. copying, drshibudon or use of the wawa *HIM inforandmi is prolitilted. If you here received din electronic umminission
in gap, please notify in by telephone (ID) 964-3060 immediately. Thank you Brow rooporalion
IRS Circuits 230 Disclosure To the extern this corrupondoece caul= federal tax Make, such advice was not Wended to a mod, end gonna
be used by any taxpayer. fm the impose of (i) avoidest paella under the Wand Revenue Code or tilsounotins. makeDnj. or
itoommoutios to grater party any transaction or meta 'darned Mein. If you would like us to prepare Wan= DX *Moo designedto provide
penalty protectun, please counts Us and we well be happy to discuss the meta with you is more Dina
confidentiatrncygetonAcquyeRt:e19,11
09/12/2019
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331938
EFTA_0020 4664
EFTA02729648

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
STATE OF FLORIDA
vs. Case Nos.: 2006-CF9454-AXX &
2008-938ICF-AX X
JEFFREY EPSTEIN
PALM BEACH POST'S MOTION TO INTERVENE
AND PETITION FOR ACCESS
Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., d/bla The Palm Beach Post (the "Post") moves to
intervene in this action for the limited purpose of seeking access to documents filed under seal.
The documents relate directly to the Defendant's guilty plea and sentence. Thus, the sealed
documents go to the heart of the disposition of this case. But in requesting that Judge Pucillo
seal these documents, the parties failed to comply with Florida's strict procedural and substantive
requirements for sealing judicial records. In addition, continued sealing of these documents is
pointless, because these documents have been discussed repeatedly in open court records. For all
of these reasons, the documents must be unsealed. As grounds for this Motion, the Post states:
1. The Post is a daily newspaper that has covered this matter and related
proceedings. In an effort to inform its readers concerning these matters, the Post relies upon
(among other things) law enforcement records and judicial records.
2. As a member of the news media, the Post has a right to intervene in criminal
proceedings for the limited purpose of seeking access to proceedings and records. See Barron v.
Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So. 2d 113, 118 (Fla. 1988) (news media have standing
to challenge any closure order); Miami Herald Publ'a Co. v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d I, 7 (Fla. 1982)
(news media must be given an opportunity to be heard on question of closure).
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFPIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331939
EFTA_002 04665
EFTA02729649

3. The particular documents under seal in this case are a non-prosecution agreement
that was docketed on July 2, 2008, and an addendum docketed on August 25, 2008. Together,
these documents apparently restrict any federal prosecution of the Defendant for offenses related
to the conduct to which he pleaded guilty in this case. Judge Pucillo accepted the agreement for
filing during a bench conference on June 30, 2008. The agreement, Judge Pucillo found, was "a
significant inducement in accepting this plea." Such agreements and related documents typically
are public record. Sec QrggsmianimbliakingCa.tUnitesLaSiairaDistriaC ourt, 920 F.2d 1462,
1465 (9th Cir. 199O) ("plea agreements have typically been open to the public"). I Inked States v
Kooislca, 796 F.3d 1390, 1390-91 (11th Cir. 1986) (documents relating to defendant's change of
plea and sentencing could be sealed only upon finding of a compelling interest that justified
denial of public access).
4. The Florida Constitution provides that judicial branch records generally must be
open for public inspection. See Art. I, § 24(a), Fla. Const. Closure of such records is allowed
only under narrow circumstances, such as to "prevent a serious and imminent threat to the fair,
impartial and orderly administration ofjustice," or to protect a compelling governmental interest.
See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(cX9)(A). Additionally, closure must be effective and no broader
than necessary to accomplish the desired purpose, and is lawful only if no less restrictive
measures will accomplish that purpose. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2. 420(c)(9)(B) & (C); Lewis,
426 So. 2d at 3.
5. In this case, the non-prosecution agreement and, later, the addendum were sealed
without any of the requisite findings. Rather, it appears from the record, the documents were
scaled merely because the Defendant's counsel represented to Judge Pucillo that the non-
prosecution agreement "is a confidential document." See Plea Conference Transcript page 38
09/12/2079 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-017
CONFPI159gNTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331940
EFTA_002 04666
EFTA02729650

(June 30, 2008). Such a representation falls well short of demonstrating a compelling interest, a
genuine necessity, narrow tailoring, and that no less restrictive measures will suffice.
Consequently, the sealing was improper and ought to be set aside.
6. In addition, at this time good cause exists for unsealing the documents because of
their public significance. Since the Defendant pleaded guilty to soliciting a minor for
prostitution, he has been named in at least 12 civil lawsuits that — like the charges in this case —
allege he brought and paid teenage girls to come his home for sex and/or "massages."' At least
I I cases are pending. In another lawsuit, one of the Defendant's accusers has alleged that
federal prosecutors failed to consult with her regarding the disposition of possible charges
against the Defendant.2 State prosecutors also have been criticized: The Palm Beach Police
Chief has faulted the State Attorney's handing of these cases as "highly unusual" and called for
the State Attorney's disqualification. Consequently, this case — and particularly the Defendant's
agreements with prosecutors - are of considerable public interest and concern.
7. The Defendant's non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors also was
important to Judge Pucillo. As she noted in the June 2008 plea conference, "1 would view [the
non-prosecution agreement] as a significant inducement in accepting this plea." See Plea
Conference Transcript page 39. Florida law recognizes a strong public right of access to
documents a court considers in connection with sentencing. Sec Sarasota Herald Tribune, Div.
See, et, Doe v. Epstein Case No. 08-80069 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No. 2 v. Epstein
Case No. 08-80119 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No. 3. v. Epstein Case No. 08-80232 (S.D. Fla. 2008);
Doe No. 4. v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80380 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No. 5 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-
80381 (S.D. Fla. 2008); C.M.A. v. Epstein Case No. 08-80811 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe v. Epstein,
Case No. 08-80893 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No. 7 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80993 (S.D. Ha. 2008);
Doc No. 6 v. Epstein Case No. 08-80994 (S.D. Fla. 2008)- Doe II v. Epstein, Case No. 09-80469
(S.D. Fla. 2009); Doe No. 101 v. Epstein Case No. 09-80591 (S.D. Fla. 2009) Doe No. 102 v.
Epstein, Case No. 09-80656 (S.D. Fla. 2009); Doe No. 8 v. Epstein, Case No. 09-80802 (S.D.
Fla. 2009).
2 See In rc: Jane Doe Case No. 08-80736 (S.D. Fla. 2008).
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFP lan NTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331941
EFTA_002 04667
EFTA02729651

of the New York Times Co. v. Holtzendorf, 507 So. 2d 667, 668 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) ("While a
judge may impose whatever legal sentence he chooses, if such sentence is based on a tangible
proceeding or document, it is within the public domain unless otherwise privileged."). In this
case, no interest justifies continued sealing of these "significant" documents that Judge Pucillo
considered in accepting the plea and sentencing the Defendant. The lack of any such
compelling interest —as well as the parties' failure to comply with the standards for sealing
documents initially —provide good cause for unsealing the documents at this time.
8. Finally, continued closure of these documents is pointless, because many portions
of the sealed documents already have been made public. For example, court papers quoting
excerpts of the agreement have been made public in related federal proceedings.3 As the Florida
Supreme Court has noted, "there would be little justification for closing a pretrial hearing in
order to prevent only the disclosure of details which had already been publicized." Lewis 426
So. 2d at 8. Similarly, in this case, to the extent that information already has been made public,
continued closure is pointless and, therefore, unconstitutional.
9. The Post has no objection to the redaction of victims' names (if any) that appear
in the sealed documents. In addition, insofar as the Defendant or State Attorney seek continued
closure, the Post requests that the Court inspect the documents in camera in order to assess
whether, in fact, continued closure is proper.
3 See, e.g.. "Defendants Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen's Motion for Stay," C.M.A. v.
Epstein, Case No. 08-80811 (S.D. Fla. July 25, 2008) (filed publicly Jan. 7, 2009).
09/12/2079 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331942
EFTA_00204668
EFTA02729652

WHEREFORE, the Post respectfully requests that this Court unseal the non-prosecution
agreement and addendum and grant the Post such other relief as the Court deems proper.
Respectfully submitted,
THOMAS, LOCICERO & BRALOW PL
pit W-41-
A, agyOn
(16 anna K. Shu
Florida Bar No.: 0514462
James B. Lake
Florida Bar No.: 0023477
101 N.E. Third Avenue, Suite 1500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (813) 984-3060
Facsimile: (813) 984-3070
Attorneys for The Palm Beach Post
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished
via facsimile and U.S. Mail to: R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney's Office - Southern
District, 500 S. Australian Ave., Ste. 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (fax: 561-820-8777);
Michael McAuliffe, Esq., and Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq., State Attorney's Office - West
Palm Beach, 401 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (fax: 561-355-7351); Jack
Alan Goldberger, Esq., Atterbury Goldberger, et al., 250 S. Australian Ave., Ste. 1400, West
Palm Beach, FL 33401 (fax: 561-835-8691); and Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. and William J.
Berger, Esq., Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650, Fort Lauderdale,
FL 33394 (fax: 954-527-8663) on this 1st day of June, 2009.
09112/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-011
CONFIbENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331943
EFTA_002 04669
EFTA02729653

Tampa
40D N. Maley Dr., Ste. 1100. Tampa. FL 33002
THOMAS I OCICFRO P.O. Box 2002. Tempe. FL 33801-2602
FP 813 90 3080 fax 813-984-3070 toll five 888-395.7100
BRALOW Ft. Lauderdale
f 01 N.E. Thad Ave.. Su. 1500
FL LlUdilfdale. FL 33301
oh 954-332-3619 lex 877-967-2244 tol hee 886-967.2009
Nene York City
220 E 42nd Si.. 1001 Floor
New Yak. NY 10017
Pi 212-210-2893 lax 212-21D-2663
tetealeattita0.=
Deanna K. Shuarnan
Direct DOI: (561) 967-2009
Deanna.SlailmangtolawfirM.com
Reply To Tampa
June 1, 2009
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS OVERNIGHT MAIL
The Honorable Jeffrey Colbath
Fifteenth Judicial Circuit-Palm Beach
Palm Beach County Courthouse
Main Judicial Complex
205 N. Dixie Highway, Room 11F
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Re:
Dear Judge Colbath:
Enclosed is a courtesy copy of non-party Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. d/b/a The Palm
Beach Post's (the "Post") Motion to Intervene and Petition for Access to certain court records in
this case. It is our understanding that Bradley Edwards and William Berger of Rothstein
Rosenfeldt Adler have filed a similar motion on behalf of a non-party known as "E.W.," and that
E.W.'s motion is set for hearing on June 10, 2009. The Post requests an opportunity to be heard
on the issue of access to these records at that time.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me
with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
THOMAS, LOCICERO & BRALOW PL
i
-etta at— `C)" n
Deanna K. Shullman
cc: Counsel of Record
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFPITTENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331944
EFTA_00204670
EFTA02729654

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT, 1525 PALM BEACH LAKES BLVD., WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401
sV
Elkkb tr14/-) —
July 1, 2009
nD -22-r
Li
n
JUL 7 - 2C'u
CASE NO.: 4D09-2554
L.T. No.: 200t8CF009381A
JEFFREY EPSTEIN v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Appellant I Petitioner(s), Appellee I Respondent(s).
BY ORDER OF THE COURT:
ORDERED that the motion to file under seal is granted.
ORDERED FURTHER that this court grants the Motion to Use One Appendix to
Support the Emergency Petition for Writ of Certiorari and Emergency Motion to Review
Denial of Stay.
ORDERED FURTHER that this court grants petitioners Emergency Motion to
Review the Order June 26, 2009, that denies the motion for stay. The June 25, 2009,
order granting the motion to unseal is stayed pending further order of this court.
ORDERED FURTHER that within ten (10) days of this order respondent shall
show cause why the petition should not be granted. Respondent shall address this
court's jurisdiction to review the order as well as the merits of the petition.
ORDERED FURTHER that petitioner may have ten (10) days thereafter to reply.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of the original court order.
Served:
Sharon R. Bock, Clerk Barbara J. Compiani Jack A. Goldberger
Robert D. Critton, Jr. Jane Kreusler-Walsh O.S. Attorneys Office
Deanna K. Shullman Spencer T. Kuvin William J. Berger
Hon. Jeffrey J. Colbath
dl
/3-esertn.na
RILWN EUTTENMULLER, Clerk
Fourth District Coun of Appeal
Page9 23
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-011
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331945
EFTA 0020467I
EFTA02729655

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH
COUNTY, FLORIDA
CRIMINAL DIVISION "W"
CASE NO. 502008CF009381AXXMB
502006CF009454AXXMB
STATE OF FLORIDA,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT
THIS MATTER came before the Court at a hearing on June 26, 2009, on Jeffrey
Epstein's Motion to Stay the Disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement and the Addendum
thereto. The Court notes the parties were present and represented by counsel. Based upon
argument, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that
1. The Motion to Stay is denied.
2. The Clerk of Court shall make the documents available for disclosure at
noon on Thursday, July 2, 2009. It is the intent of the Court to give the
Defendant, Mr. Epstein, and his attorney an opportunity to have this
Court's orders reviewed by the 4th DCA. If the Clerk gets no direction from
the Appellate Court, she shall disclose the documents on the date referred
to above.
DONE AND ORDERED in West Palm Bea 1. Palm Beach County, MOM
JUL 1 - 2C09
day of June, 2009.
\'OUvLi
APPEALS DIV.
J
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONF P lIan tattat
SDNY_GM_00331946
EFTA_00204672
EFTA02729656

•
Page Two
Case No. 502008CF009381AXXMB/502006CF009454A)0CMB
Order Denying Motion to Stay Disclosure Agreement
Copies furnished:
R. Alexander Acosta, U.S. Attorney's Office - Southern District
500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Barbara Burns, Esq., State Attorney's Office
401 North Dixie Highway
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
William J. Berger, Esq.
Bradley .). Edwards, Esq.
Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler
401 East Las Olas Boulevard., Suite 1650
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33394
Robert D. Critton, Esq.
Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman
515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
lack A. Goldberger, Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq.
Leopold-Kuvin, P.A.
2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
Deanna K. Shullman, Esq.
P. O. Box 2602
Tampa, FL 33602
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331947
EFTA_00204673
EFTA02729657

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY
FLORIDA, CRIMINAL DIVISION
STATE OF FLORIDA,
vs. Case Nos.2006-CF9454 AMC
JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 2008-9381CF AMC
Defendant.
NONPARTY E.W.'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS
E.W., a nonparty, moves pursuant to Administrative Rule 2.303 for attorneys fees
and costs on the following grounds:
1. EW is filed a motion to vacate the agreed order sealing records and to unseal
the nonprosecutuion agreement and addendum in this file. Also, E.W. opposed
defendant's motion to unseal said records. E.W.'s motion was granted and defendant's
was denied at hearing on June 26, 2009.
2. E.W. is entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys fees and costs pursuant to
said Administrative Rule. Defendant's motion to seal and his opposition to E.W.'s
motion were not made in good faith and were not supported by a sound legal or factual
basis.
3. E.W. adopts and incorporates by reference all arguments in the motion for fees
filed by The Palm Beach Post.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a ttue and correct copy of the foregoing has been served
via U.S. Mail this art{ day of July, 2009 to: Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq., Atterbury
Goldberger et al., 250 Australian Ave. South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401;
Page
OW1212019 Agency to Agency Requet 19-411
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331948
EFTA_00204674
EFTA02729658

Michael McAuliffe, Esq. and Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq., State Attorney's Office-West
Palm Beach, 401 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; and Deanna K.
Shullman, Esq. and James B. Lake, Esq., 101 N.E. Third Avenue, Suite 1500, Fort
Lauderdale, FL 33301.
ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER
Attorneys for E.W.
401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394
Telephone (954) 522-3456
Telecopier (954) 527-8663
By:
William J. Berger
TCX
Florida Bar No. 197701
wbergerrikra-law.com
H Isurdocs‘09-22784 Wild v. EpsteitikEPSTEIN M.FEES.doc
09112/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONF PEENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331949
EFTA_00204675
EFTA02729659

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH
COUNTY, FLORIDA
CRIMINAL DIVISION "W"
CASE NO. 502008CF009381AXXMB
502006CF009454AXXM8
STATE OF FLORIDA,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT
THIS MATTER came before the Court at a hearing on June 26, 2009, on Jeffrey
Epstein's Motion to Stay the Disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement and the Addendum
thereto. The Court notes the parties were present and represented by counsel. Based upon
argument, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that
1. The Motion to Stay is denied.
2. The Clerk of Court shall make the documents available for disclosure at
noon on Thursday, July 2, 2009. It is the intent of the Court to give the
Defendant, Mr. Epstein, and his attorney an opportunity to have this
Court's orders reviewed by the e DCA. If the Clerk gets no direction from
the Appellate Court, she shall disclose the documents on the date referred
to above.
DONE AND ORDERED in West Palm Beach, lorida this
day of June, 2009. JUN 2 6 2009
JUDGE JEFFREY!. COLBATH
Pe
JEFFREY J. COLBATI1
09112/2019 aae Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CON rig iN °11
SDNY_GM_00331950
EFTA 00204676
EFTA02729660

Page Two
Case No. 502008CF009381A,VMB/502006CF009454/00MB
Order Denying Motion to Stay Disclosure Agreement
Copies furnished:
R. Alexander Acosta, U.S. Attorney's Office - Southern District
500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Barbara Burns, Esq., State Attorneys Office
401 North Dixie Highway
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
William J. Berger, Esq.
Bradley). Edwards, Esq.
Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler
401 East Las Olas Boulevard., Suite 1650
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33394
Robert D. Critton, Esq.
Burman, Critton, Luther & Coleman
515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Jack A. Goldberger, Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq.
Leopold-Kwin, P.A.
2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
Deanna K. Shullman, Esq.
P. O. Box 2602
Tampa, FL 33602
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFPIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331951
EFTA J)0204677
EFTA02729661

r ° 1
-4 0 4
-4 3
3
. w . 0 E
D
0 O
a
$ P
C
- IZ
\ s t a 4 4 M O
mr 5 9 R F
e s e f c 1.11 2 0 4 2 4 0 0 0 D E L IA M
h
c
a
e
B
m
la
P
r f t
,
_ q s E t s e W y 1 0 4 3
r b
A
. . , o t k
a
e
s
- e c iffO
s
a w h g
iH
e
3 L F
, h
c
a
°
) )
(
a
e v
e t S
-
'y
e n
r o ttA
ix
iD
h tr
o
e
B
m la
P
a
lt id e ta
N
1 t s e
6
9 2
u 4 tS 0 4 W 4 +
1
0
4
3
3
‘ N 1 0
11141.3
A
1 IIK
‘ w 1 st4e/C
" / :
•
•
-
h ta b lo
C
.J y e
rffe J e g
d
y a w h g
iH
e ix iD
h tr o N
5
4 3 3 L F
,h
c a e B
m la P ts
e
O L P .H C
A
ro 4 0 ..la
r I a r
u0W
J2
•
O
0
, m f
o
§
m
SONA-MVC0C£169Z
EFTA02729662

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY. FLORIDA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
STATE OF FLORIDA
vs. Case Nos.: 2006-CF9454-AXX &
2008-9381CF-A)0C
JEFFREY EPSTEIN
COPY
RECEIVED FOR FILlivi
INTERVENOR PALM BEACH POST'S
MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
SHAURNON2 R2.1 B1O°C9 K
Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc.. &bin The Palm Beach Post (the -Post-) mov C eg Lr a cCitOinMi r^T ROLLS
IL DIVISIONN
for an award of attorneys' fees and costs in connection with this matter. In support thereof, the
Post states:
The Post is a daily newspaper that has covered this matter and related
proceedings. In an effort to inform its readers concerning these matters, the Post relies upon
(among other things) law enforcement records and judicial records.
2. On June 10. 2009. the Court panted the Post's Motion to Intervene in this action
for the purpose of seeking access to court records. Specifically. the Post sought access to a non-
prosecution agi cwent that xas docketed on July 2, 2008, and an addendum docketed on August
25, 2008.
3. On June 25, 2009, the Court heard oral argument on the Post's (and other non-
parties') motions. The Court found that the documents has not properly been sealed in the first
instance and further denied Defendant's Motion to Make Court Records Confidential dated June
I I. 2009.
4. The Post is entitled to its fess and costs in this matter pursuant to Administrative
Order Number 2.303 of this Court. Specifically, Rule 2.303 allows sanctions to be imposed
Page
0911212019 Agency to Agency Requet 19-411
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331953
EF1'A_00204679
EFTA02729663

•
against the moving party -if a motion to seal is not made in good faith and is not supported by a
sound legal and factual basis." Admin. Or. 15th Jud. Cir. Fla. 2.303.
5. In this case. Mr. Epstein's Motion to Make Court Records Confidential was
neither made in good faith nor supported by a sound legal and factual basis. Defendant's Motion
asserted four interests that ostensibly would be protected by closure, but the motion cited no facts
in support of that assertion. At the hearing on the motion, Defendant made no additional effort
to demonstrate how and why the asserted interests would be served by closure. Instead.
Defendant's arguments addressed extraneous. inapplicable issues that did not support closure and
demonstrated the Defendant's lack of good faith in bringing his motion. In sum, the motion was
wholly without merit. and the Post is entitled to an award of its fees and costs in defending its
rights of access.
WHEREFORE, the Post respectfully requests that this Court award to it its fees and costs
in connection with this matter and grant such other relief as the Court deems proper.
Respectfully submitted.
THQ!t1AS, LOCICERO & BRALOW PL
Deanna K. Shullman —
Florida Bar No.: 0514462
James B. Lake
Florida Bar No: 0023477
101 N.E. Third Avenue. Suite 1500
Fort Lauderdale. FL 33301
Telephone: (813) 984-3060
Facsimile: (313) 984-3070
Attorneys for The Palm Beach Post
09112/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331954
EFTA_00204680
EFTA02729664

4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CE "IFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished
Os II
via hand ivery to Jac Alan Goldberger, Esq.. Atterbury Goldberger, et al., 250 S.
Australian Ave.. Ste. 1400. West Palm Beach. FL 33401 (fax: 561-835-8691 and via U.S, mail
to Michael McAuliffe, Esq., and Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq.. State Attorney's Office - West
Palm Beach. 401 North Dixie Highway. West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (fax: 561-355-7351);); on
this d-"-ti day of June. 2009-
Attorney
09/12/2019 Agency to Agency Requet 19-411
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331955
EFTA_0020468 I
EFTA02729665

T
H
4 0 O
0
P .O N .
A
M
2 6
. B
o
x
sh
ley
O
A
S
0
2 .
T
r.
S
u
a m it 1 BL
a . F 1 0 0 RO
L 3 3 6 0 I-2 6 . T a n y a . R A L O C I C
0 2 3 3 6 W E
0
2 R
O
I
r
a
&
t
i
t
*
4
.2
.5
1
6
W4
0
S
ta
e s t
P
1 N
o
a t e
A
n
-
a lm r t h t t o A (
B
Dr
nr
b
eix e yt o
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a c h , F L ie H ig h w O f f i c e s o , c ) t m b
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 0 1 a y - W e s E s q . i t t - ' k
1 t
P - o
a
lm d
B i
d
e
a
c A
h
t
!
0
8
W2 5 0 F IR U S
I E R 3 3 6 0 2 0 0 5 5 2 2 9 9 3 S T -C L A S S P O S T A G E $ 0 . 4 4 12
0
0 z L
L
k
o
z
r
'
<
j
C
SDNY_GM_00331956
LL g
uu o
EFTA02729666

Css e 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 305 Entered on FLSO Docket 09/17/2009 Page 1 of 8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 08-CY-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON
JANE DOE NO. 2,
PlaintifC
v.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
Related Cases:
08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994,
08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469,
09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092.
DEFENDANTS, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND
TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE NO. 4 AND MEMORANDUM IN
SUPPORT THEREOF
Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys, moves this
court for an order granting sanctions pursuant to Rule 30(dX2) aril (3)(A) and (C) (referencing
Rule 37(aX5)), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and compelling the deposition of Jane Doe No.
4 within fifteen (15) days and as grounds therefore would state:
1. On August 16, 2009, the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was noticed for September
16, 2009 to begin at 1:00 p.m. Plaintiff's counsel had advised that Jane Doe No. 4 could not
appear for a deposition prior to that time of day, i.e. 1:00 p.m.
2. The deposition was originally set at the offices of the undersigned, but Plaintiffs
counsel requested that it be moved to the court reporter's office. The court reporter is Prose
Court Reporting located at 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, FL
33401.
09112/2019 Agency to Agency Requet: 19-411
CONFPIDE9 NTIAL
SDNY_GM_00331957
EFTA_00204683
EFTA02729667