016-12.pdf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON

JANE DOE NO. 2,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
____________________________________/
Related Cases:
08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994,
08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469,
09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092,
____________________________________/

PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 4’S MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Motion
for Sanctions and Motion for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, and states
as follows:

1. By now, this Court is familiar with Jeffrey Epstein’s practice of intimidating and
harassing his victims, as well as the Plaintiffs’ level of fear of Jeffrey Epstein. See, e.g. Plaintiffs
Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102’s Motion for No-Contact Order (D.E. 113); Plaintiffs
Jane Does 2-7’s Response to Defendant’s Motion to Compel and/or Identify Plaintiffs in the
Style of this Case (D.E. 144); Plaintiffs Jane Does’ 2-7 Motion for Protective Order and
Incorporated Memorandum of Law (D.E. 223); Plaintiffs Jane Doe Nos. 2-8’s Motion for
Protective Order as to Jeffrey Epstein’s Attendance at Deposition of Plaintiffs, and Incorporated
Memorandum of Law (D.E. 292); Affidavit of Dr. Kliman (D.E. 223, Exh. A).

2. On September 16, 2009, Jeffrey Epstein’s conduct reached a new low when he
recklessly violated (i) this Court’s No-Contact Order dated July 31, 2009; and (2) a written
stipulation between the parties that Jeffrey Epstein would not attend the deposition of Jane Doe
No. 4 or be seen by Jane Doe No. 4 while attending her deposition.

3. Prior to the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, the Plaintiffs filed a Motion for
Protective Order to preclude Jeffrey Epstein from attending the depositions of the Plaintiffs.
The Motion was filed for the specific purpose of preventing Jeffrey Epstein from intimidating or
harassing the Plaintiffs as he has repeatedly done in the past. As the Motion had not been
adjudicated prior to the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Plaintiff’s counsel stipulated with defense
counsel that “Jeffrey Epstein will not attend the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4.” It was further
stipulated that Jeffrey Epstein may listen to the deposition by telephone or view a videofeed of
the deposition, but under no circumstances was he to be seen by our client while attending the
deposition. (See Exhibit “C”, email of September 15, 2009). These were express conditions
agreed to by counsel before Jane Doe No. 4 would appear for deposition on September 16, 2009.

4. The deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was scheduled for 1:00 p.m. on September 16,
2009 at 350 Australian Ave South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida.

5. At approximately 1:00 p.m. on September 16, 2009, Jane Doe No. 4 and her
counsel were walking in the lobby of 350 Australian Ave South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach,
Florida, toward the ground-floor conference room where her deposition was to be held.1

1 Defendant’s counsel set the deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 for the same office building where
Jeffrey Epstein has an office.

Just a few feet away from this conference room, Jeffrey Epstein crossed paths with Jane Doe No. 4.
Jeffrey Epstein stopped walking and began staring at her. He intimidated her until she began to
cry. Jeffrey Epstein made no immediate attempt to walk away from our client. Instead, he
stopped and continued to stare at her until she ran away. Jeffrey Epstein was accompanied by
what appeared to be his bodyguard. See Declaration of Adam Horowitz, counsel for Jane Doe
No. 4, Exhibit “A”.

6. Jane Doe No. 4 became an emotional wreck upon being stared at by Jeffrey
Epstein, whom she believed she would not encounter. After attempting to console his client,
Plaintiff’s counsel cancelled the deposition after a brief discussion with defense counsel about
the events that occurred in the lobby. See Transcript of Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Exhibit
“B”.

7. Jeffrey Epstein’s contact with and intimidation of Jane Doe No. 4 is in direct
violation of this Court’s No-Contact Order dated July 31, 2009. In that Order, this Court stated
that Jeffrey Epstein shall have no “direct or indirect contact” with the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 238).

8. The July 31, 2009 Order mirrored the June 30, 2008 criminal sentence entered by
Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillio, wherein she instructed Jeffrey Epstein
that he shall have “no direct or indirect contact” with the Plaintiffs. (D.E. 238)

9. There can be no doubt that Jeffrey Epstein knew where Jane Doe No. 4
would be at 1 p.m. on September 16, 2009. Of all of the places he could have been, he chose
to be at the location of her deposition in flagrant disregard of two (2) No-Contact Orders
and the stipulation of the parties in this case. Even worse, when he saw Jane Doe No. 4, he
chose to stop and stare her down to the point of intimidation until she began to cry and flee.

10. This Court has discretion to enter a protective order to protect a party from
annoyance, embarrassment or oppression. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). In this regard, the Court has
discretion for cause shown to, inter alia, designate the persons who may attend depositions, and
specify the time and place of discovery. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c)(1)(A) and (E). Additionally, this
Court has authority to sanction a party for civil contempt for violating the terms of a court order.
See Sizzler Family Steak Houses v. Western Sizzlin Steak House, Inc., 793 F.2d 1529, 1534-35
(11th Cir. 1986) (attorneys’ fees may be awarded for civil contempt in failure to comply with
court order).

11. Jeffrey Epstein is a felon and registered sex offender. Judicial oversight, at
Jeffrey Epstein’s expense, is required to keep his conduct under control.

12. Given Jeffrey Epstein’s violation of this Court’s No-Contact Order and the
written stipulation of the parties, appropriate sanctions and other relief are necessary to
compensate Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 and prevent future misconduct by Defendant Epstein.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4, respectfully requests (1) an award of sanctions,
including attorneys’ fees and costs reasonably and necessarily incurred by Plaintiff due to
Defendant’s non-compliance with the Court’s No-Contact Order; (2) an Order excusing Jane
Doe No. 4 from her deposition on September 16, 2009, due to Defendant’s violation of the No-
Contact Order and defense counsel’s breach of his promise to Plaintiff’s counsel that Defendant
would not be seen at Plaintiff’s deposition; (3) an order directing that any depositions of
Plaintiffs in the future be at a court reporter’s office selected by Plaintiffs’ counsel; (4)
appointment of a special master to preside at Plaintiffs’ depositions and control the proceeding,
to be paid for by Defendant; and (5) all other relief as this Court deems just and appropriate.

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3
Undersigned counsel has conferred with Defendant’s counsel in a good faith effort to
resolve the issues raised in this motion, and has been unable to do so.

Dated: September 17, 2009. Respectfully submitted,
By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz
Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245)
ssm@sexabuseattorney.com
Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980)
ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com
MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218
Miami, Florida 33160
Tel: (305) 931-2200
Fax: (305) 931-0877

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on September 17, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document
with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being
served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via
transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized
manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic
Filing.
/s/ Adam D. Horowitz

SERVICE LIST
DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN
United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq.
jgoldberger@agwpa.com
Robert D. Critton, Esq.
rcritton@bclclaw.com
Bradley James Edwards
bedwards@rra-law.com
Isidro Manuel Garcia
isidrogarcia@bellsouth.net
Jack Patrick Hill
jph@searcylaw.com
Katherine Warthen Ezell
KEzell@podhurst.com
Michael James Pike
MPike@bclclaw.com
Paul G. Cassell
cassellp@law.utah.edu
Richard Horace Willits
lawyerwillits@aol.com
Robert C. Josefsberg
rjosefsberg@podhurst.com

EXHIBIT A
DECLARATION OF ADAM D. HOROWITZ
1. My name is Adam D. Horowitz. I am an attorney for Jane Doe No. 4.
2. The deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 was scheduled for September 16, 2009 at 1:00
p.m. at 350 Australian Ave. South, Suite 115, West Palm Beach, Florida. On the day before the
deposition, the undersigned and counsel for Jeffrey Epstein entered into a written stipulation in
which it was agreed that “Jeffrey Epstein will not attend tomorrow’s deposition of Jane Doe No.
4 (in the absence of a court order permitting him to attend).” It was further agreed that Jeffrey
Epstein may listen in to the deposition by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but
under no circumstances would he “be seen by our client.”
3. While Jane Doe No. 4 and I were in the lobby of 350 Australian Ave South at
approximately 1:00 p.m. for her deposition on September 16, 2009, we crossed paths with
Jeffrey Epstein and someone who appeared to be his bodyguard. Jeffrey Epstein stopped
walking and began to stare at and intimidate Jane Doe No. 4. Jane Doe No. 4 was terrified,
began crying and ran outside the building. Jeffrey Epstein smirked at her and walked away.
4. As a result of this incident, Jane Doe began crying uncontrollably and was unable
to proceed with her deposition.
Under penalties of perjury I declare that I have read the foregoing Declaration and the
facts stated in it are true.
Dated: September 17, 2009
s/ Adam D. Horowitz

EXHIBIT B
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON
JANE DOE NO.2,
Plaintiff,
-vs-
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF JANE DOE #4
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
1:03 - 1:08 p.m.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 115
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Reported By:
Cynthia Hopkins, RPR, FPR
Notary Public, State of Florida
Prose Court Reporting

APPEARANCES:
On behalf of the Plaintiff:
ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE
MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 2218
Miami, Florida 33160
Phone: 305.931.2200

On behalf of the Defendant:
ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE
MARK T. LUTTIER, ESQUIRE
BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP
303 Banyan Boulevard
Suite 400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Phone: 561.842.2820

On behalf of Jeffrey Epstein:
JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-5012
Phone: 561.659.8300

On behalf of LM and EW:
WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQUIRE
ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER
401 East Las Olas Boulevard
Suite 1650
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
Phone: 954.522.3456

On behalf of CMA:
JACK P. HILL, ESQUIRE
SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA,
BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A.
2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard
West Palm Beach, Florida 33409

APPEARNCES CONTINUED ...
On behalf of BB:
ADAM J. LANGINO, ESQUIRE
LEOPOLD KUVIN
2925 PGA Boulevard
Suite 200
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410
Phone: 561.515.1400

P R O C E E D I N G S
MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, counsel for Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4.
MR. CRITTON: Cindy, what time is it?
THE COURT REPORTER: It is 1:03.
MR. BERGER: William J. Berger for LM and EW.
MR. HILL: Jack Hill for CMA.
MR. LANGINO: Adam Langino from Leopold Kuvin on behalf of BB.
MR. LUTTIER: Mark Luttier on behalf of Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman for the Defendant.
MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton on behalf of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein.
MR. HOROWITZ: This is Adam Horowitz. We're canceling today's deposition. Before appearing here today, we had a stipulation with Defense counsel that Mr. Jeffrey Epstein, the Defendant, would not be here. He would not cross paths with our client.
And immediately as we were approaching the deposition room, he made face-to-face contact with our client. He was just feet away from her and intimidated her, and for that reason we're not going forward.
MR. CRITTON: I didn't see any contact because I, obviously, was not out there. We started at about -- when you came in it was approximately 1:03. Mr. Epstein has an office here at the Florida Science Foundation. Had you been here at 1:00, your paths never would have crossed because Mr. Epstein was leaving the building. I instructed him to leave the building so that he would not be here. He was going to appear by way of Skype so that he could be on a video camera so that he could see this.
(Mr. Goldberger entered the room.)
MR. CRITTON: Had you been here on time, and not faulting, I am just saying had you been here on time at 1:00, as everyone else seemed to be here at least get here before you did, Adam, you and your client, your paths never would have crossed. I directed Mr. Epstein to leave the building so he would not be here so that there would be no way that your paths could have crossed. It was neither my intent nor was it my client's intent specifically, because I also advised him that he was not to cross paths, not to have any contact with your client, and certainly by our agreement not to be here today for the deposition.
MR. HOROWITZ: And at approximately 1:00 is exactly when my client crossed paths with Jeffrey Epstein. And not only did he cross paths but he proceeded to stare her down just feet away from her. For that reason she became an emotional wreck and cannot proceed with the deposition. She's simply not in an emotional state to do so.
And in addition Mr. Epstein violated the agreement between counsel that he would not cross paths or come into contact with our client. And it will be also for the criminal court judge to decide whether he has violated a no-contact order.
MR. CRITTON: I have nothing else to say. Again I instructed Mr. Epstein to leave the building so absolutely no contact could occur between he and Mr. Horowitz and his client nor anyone else. Until the court, until either Judge Marra or Judge Johnson ruled on the issue as to whether or not he could appear at the depositions of not only Jane Doe 4 but any other individuals, so you do what you need to do.
MR. HOROWITZ: Off the record.
(The Deposition was concluded.)

C E R T I F I C A T E
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
I, Cynthia Hopkins, Registered Professional Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, State of Florida at large, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes.
Dated this 16th day of September, 2009.
Cynthia Hopkins, RPR, FPR

EXHIBIT C
Adam Horowitz
From: Adam Horowitz
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:43 AM
To: 'Michael J. Pike'; 'Robert D. Critton Jr.'
Cc: Stuart Mermelstein
Subject: Jane Does v. Epstein
Please allow this to confirm that Jeffrey Epstein will not attend tomorrow's deposition of Jane Doe No. 4 (in the absence of a Court order permitting him to attend). We understand you may wish to have your client listen in by telephone or view a videofeed of the deposition, but will not be seen by our client.
Regards,
Adam D. Horowitz, Esq.
www.sexabuseattorney.com
Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218
Miami, FL 33160
ahorowitz@sexabuseattorney.com
Tel: (305) 931-2200
Fax: (305) 931-0877