UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. THE PARTIES' JOINT STATUS REPORT AND MOTION FOR REVISED BRIEFING AND DISCOVERY SCHEDULE The parties, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Joint Status Report and Motion for Revised Briefing and Discovery Schedule. In support thereof, the parties state: 1. Briefing and responses to discovery in this matter were stayed while the parties pursued settlement negotiations with the assistance of U.S. Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon. After Judge Brannon declared an impasse, the parties continued to pursue settlement. While those efforts will continue, at this time the parties believe that the Court should re-institute a briefing schedule on the petitioners' pending summary judgment motion and re-set the deadline for the government to respond to the petitioners' amended disco
Summary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. THE PARTIES' JOINT STATUS REPORT AND MOTION FOR REVISED BRIEFING AND DISCOVERY SCHEDULE The parties, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Joint Status Report and Motion for Revised Briefing and Discovery Schedule. In support thereof, the parties state: 1. Briefing and responses to discovery in this matter were stayed while the parties pursued settlement negotiations with the assistance of U.S. Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon. After Judge Brannon declared an impasse, the parties continued to pursue settlement. While those efforts will continue, at this time the parties believe that the Court should re-institute a briefing schedule on the petitioners' pending summary judgment motion and re-set the deadline for the government to respond to the petitioners' amended disco
Persons Referenced (4)
“...e able to receive notice via the CM/ECF system. 2 EFTA00211158 SERVICE LIST Jane Does 1 and 2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN United State...”
Bradley EdwardsJane Doe #1Jane Doe #2“...RN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. THE PARTIES' JOINT STATUS REPORT AND MOTION FOR...”
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Technical Artifacts (1)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
301-3268Related Documents (6)
EFTA02726140
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 0372112011 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOT TO WITHHOLD RELEVANT EVIDENCE COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for an order from this Court directing the U.S. Attorney's Office not to suppress material evidence relevant to this case. The Court should enter an order, as it would in other criminal or civil cases, requiring the Government to make appropriate production of such evidence to the victims. BACKGROUND In discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about this case, counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 inquired about whether the Office would voluntarily provide to the victims information in its possession that was mater
Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 217 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/13/2010 Page 1 of 7
Subjec
Fr • < > Subjec :Deliberative t Process ec aratton rom am Justice - equest or wo ee xtension Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:59:47 +0000 Importance: Normal We have no objection, provided we get the following accommodation, which you already anticipated. We would request that your motion for extension of time give us an extension on our reply document, such that our reply would be due 10 days after the main Justice Department declaration that will be coming in two weeks. If you would include such language as well in any proposed order, saving us (and the court) drafting time, that would be very much appreciated. Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G Cassell CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message along with any/all attachments is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 0372172011 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 1. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOT TO WITHHOLD RELEVANT EVIDENCE COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for an order from this Court directing the U.S. Attorney's Office not to suppress material evidence relevant to this case. The Court should enter an order, as it would in other criminal or civil cases, requiring the Government to make appropriate production of such evidence to the victims. BACKGROUND In discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about this case, counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 inquired about whether the Office would voluntarily provide to the victims information in its possession that was mater
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 I UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. I. I, Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. Along with co-counsel, I have represented Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 in civil suits against Jeffrey Epstein for sexually abusing them. I have also represented other girls who were sexually abused by Epstein. As a result of that representation, I have become familiar with many aspects of the criminal investigation against Epstein and have reviewed discovery and correspondence connected with the criminal investigation. I have also spoken to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 at length about the criminal investigation and their involvement in it, as well enforcement (or lack their of) of their rights as crime victims in the investigation. I also represent Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 in the pen
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.