EFTA00608537

1 (Pages 1 to 4) Page 1 Page 3 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL? 1 INDEX CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY. FLORIDA 2 Complex Litigation. Fla R.Civ.Pro.1201 3 Deposition of Russell S. Adler: Page No. 4 Direct Examination by Mrs. April 4 CASE NO. 50 2009CA040800XXXXMB AG 5 Cross Examination by Mr. King 151 6 Certificate of Oath 155 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 7 Certificate of Reporter 156 vs. 8 Read and Sign Letter to Witness 157 SCOTT ROTHSTEIN. Individually. 9 Errata Sheet (to be forwarded upon execution) 158 BRADLEY J. EDWARDS. individually. 10 and L M individually, • • • Defendants. 11 12 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT INDEX 13 Exhibit. Description Page No. DEPOSITION OF 14 No. 1 Subpoena For Deposition Duces Tecum 6 RUSSELL S. ADLER 15 Taken on Behalf of the Plaintiff 16 DEFENDANTS EXHIBIT INDEX DATE TAKEN: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 TIME: 9-10 AM - 3 CO PM 17 No. Description Page No. PLACE: Fowler White Burnett. PA 18 NONE " -a One Financial Plaza • 21st Floor 19 100 Southeast 3rd Avenue Fort Lauderdale. FL 33394 20 21 Examination of the witness taken before: 22 Lee Lynott. Certified Merit Reporter 23 Registered Professional Reporter Certified Shorthand Reporter, Florida 24 Hi-TechAlnited Reporting. Inc. 25 1218 SE 3rd Avenue Page 2 Page 4 1 THEREUPON. 2 THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm APPEARANCE FOR THE PLAINTIFF: FOWLER WHITE BURNETT. P.A. 3 that the testimony you are about to give will be BY: SUSAN APRIL. ESQUIRE 4 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the One Financial Plaza - 21st Floor 5 truth? 100 Southeast 3rd Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394 6 •' • 7 WHEREUPON, APPEARANCE FOR THE DEFENDANT BRADLEY EDWARDS. 8 RUSSELL S. ADLER SEARCY DENNEY SCAROLA BAFINHAFtT 8 SHIPLEY 9 acknowledged having been Sat duty sworn to tell the BY: WILI-WA KING, ESQUIRE 10 truth. testified upon his oath as follows: 2139 Pam Beath Lakes Boulevwd 0 West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 11 THE WITNESS: I do. 11 12 DIRECT EXAMINATION APPEARANCE FOR THE VOTRESS. RUSSELL S ADLER: 13 BY MRS. APRIL: 1 FRED HADDAD LAW OFFICES 14 Q Sir, my name is Susan April. WO Snit just a 13 BY: FRED HADDAD, ESQUIRE 15 few minutes ago I guess on the other side of the room One Financial Plan - Suite 2812 16 here. Thank you for corning today. 100 Southeast 3rd Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 17 You know, of course, Mr. Haddad is your 18 lawyer today, right? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And you know Bill King over here? 21 A Just met him. 22 Q Just met him? And you were out In the 23 hallway talking to him for a moment? 24 A Yes. 25 0 Can I ask you what you were talking about? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608537 2 (Pages 5 to 8) Page 5 Page 7 1 A What we were talking about? 1 In the middle of Page 6. 2 CI Yeah. 2 A I'm looking at it 3 A Just the fact that much of what we 3 Q Did you search for any documents that you 4 anticipate that you're going to ask is protected by 4 believe would be responsive to these requests? 5 the work-product privilege and I told him I would 5 A I'm reading it Hold on 6 invoke it as I see necessary. 6 0 Well, let's go through It because it will 7 0 Mighty. Let me get down some basic 7 save time I think. 8 information. Is your full name Russell S. Adler? A Go ahead. 9 A Yes. 9 0 The first one: Did you look to see if you 10 0 Can I get your current address? 10 had documents evidencing any and all written 11 A I'm presently residing at 2200 South Ocean 11 communications between you and Bradley Edwards 12 Lane in Fort Lauderdale. 12 regarding any pending and/or contemplating litigation 13 0 Are you currently employed? 13 against Jeffrey Epstein from September 2008 to the 14 A Self-employed. 14 present? 15 0 What is the name of your business? 15 A Let me save you some time and paint with a 16 A Russell S. Adler, P.A. 16 broad brush. Any communications between myself or 17 0 And where Is your business address? 17 &ad Edwards - or I see you even have Scott Rothstein 18 A 401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400. 18 listed in another one of these requests - during the 19 0 How long have you been with that firm as a 19 time that I was employed by the RRA firm is 20 self-employed attorney? 20 work-product privilege and I invoke that privilege 21 A Since November 2009. 21 and I will refuse to answer any questions concerning 22 Q What's your date of birth, sir? 22 any such communications. That privilege extends to 23 A 11/26/61. 23 any of these documents that you're requesting that 24 0 Are you taking any medications or anything 24 fits within those parameters. 25 that would impair your ability to testify truthfully 25 0 Well, let me — Page 6 Page 8 I today - 1 A As to Number 1. there is absolutely nothing 2 A No. 2 concerning this from, let's say, November or October 3 Q — or Impair your memory? 3 31st, 2009 through the present. 4 Did you see a Notice of Taking Deposition 4 As to anything from 2008 through November 5 with an attached subpoena for this deposition? 5 of 2009, that would be the time that I was employed 6 A I saw the subpoena. I don't know that I 6 by RRA and you are not entitled to those documents 7 ever saw the notice. 7 it in fact, they even exist because it's 8 0 Did you bring any documents with you today? 8 work-product privilege. 9 A No, 9 0 Well, let me ask you this question. You 10 0 DId you understand the subpoena to request 10 just said if, in fact, they even exist What I'm 11 that you bring documents? 11 asking you is, let's go back to my earlier questions: 12 A Please show it to me. 12 Did you look to see if you have any documents, 13 Q 'will. 13 whether or not they would be work-product, for that 14 A I may have read it I don't recall what it 14 period of time? 15 says as I sit here now. 15 A I don't even have access to those documents 16 (WHEREUPON. the document was marked as an 16 any more. They're the property of the bankruptcy 17 Plaintiffs Exhibit No. I for Identification and 17 trustee — 18 attached). 18 (WHEREUPON, an off-the-record discussion 19 A I guess you want me to look at the daces 19 was had). 20 team? 20 A First of all, you interrupted me in the 21 Q Please. Do you recall seeing that, sir? 21 middle of my answer to the question. 22 A Briefly. 22 0 rm sorry. She barged in. 23 0 Can you tell me on page - Well, its 23 A Let me finish, numbered Page 6 because it was numbered I guess as on 24 MRS. APRIL: How about you read it back? . attachment to a notice, but where it says "requests" 25 (WHEREUPON, the requested testimony was United Reporting, inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608538 3 (Pages 9 to 12) Page 9 Page 11 1 read back by the court reporter). 0 Dld you look to see if you have any? 2 THE WITNESS' They're the property of the 2 A No. But I was not even involved in Brad 3 bankruptcy Trustee. I don't even know if I'm 3 Edwards' compensation or benefits when he was hired 4 still a member of any QTASK process concerning 4 by RRA, so I know I don't have anything .. I know 5 these matters. 5 that there's nothing We that out there. And if 6 But in any event, the Trustee has made it 6 there is. I don't have access to it any way. 7 very clear that the files that were being 7 Q Lot me ask you about that for a minute. 8 handled by the firm are the property of the 8 When Brad Edwards -- You know Brad Edwards, I take 9 bankruptcy Trustee unless they have been 9 It, because you mentioned his name several times? 10 transferred out to another attorney, and they 10 A Yes 11 were not transferred to me. So. no. I do not 11 0 When did you first meet Brad Edwards? 12 have the right to see those files or access to 12 A Probably four or five years ago. 13 those files. 13 0 Where Old you meet him? 14 BY MRS. APRIL: 14 A At the gym. I'm sorry. He appeared - He 15 Q So you don't have them you're saying? 15 did some work on a case when he was with the Kubido, 16 A Correct 16 Draper firm. It was a personal injury case when he 17 0 Therefore, you cidn't look because you know 17 worked for Earleen Cote. 18 you don't have them? 18 0 Was that a case that you were involved in? 19 A Correct. 19 A Yes 20 Q I think, just to be clear, that you said 20 Q Were you on the same side? 21 anything from November 1st, 2009 to the present is 21 A No. 22 nothing that exists that's responsive to Number 1? 22 0 Ho was opposing counsel? 23 A Correct 23 A Defense counsel, yes. 24 0 Number 2, did you look to see If you had 24 0 Do you know what year that was? 25 any communications, and that would include e-malls, 25 A Nope. Page 10 Page 12 1 between you and Mr. Edwards about compensation or 1 0 About five years ago? 2 benefits that he expected or requested from the firm 2 A Approximately. 3 from September 2008 to October 31st 2000 — 3 0 And then you mentioned something about — 4 A There were no such communications — a A Wait a minute. Now, that would be probably Q Can I finish my question, sir? I know 5 seven or eight years ago now that I think about it. 6 you've been In depositions, right? 6 Sorry. 7 A Well, why don't you just ask me if I have 7 Q And Earleen Coat (pronouncing), is that the 8 anything responsive to Number 2? You don't have t0 B name you said? 9 read it to me on the record. I can read. 9 A C-o-t.e 10 Q Sir, this will go smoother and faster. I 10 Q She was at the time an attorney at Kubicki, 11 think I'm being courteous to you — 11 Draper? 12 A It will go a lot faster 12 A Still is 13 0 If you're not going to let me finish my 13 Q How did that case hum out? 14 questions, we're going to be here really long and I 19 A I don't even remember what case it was, so 5 have things to do also. 15 I can't tell you how it turned out. 16 A if you insist on reading everything to me 16 Q After that did you have any occasion to 17 that is right in front of me it is going to take 17 communicate with him before he joined RRA? And I'm 18 realty long. but I'm not going to tell you how to 18 going to use RRA for your former firm of Rothstein, 19 take your deposition. So, finish the question. 19 Rosenfeldt 8 Adler, If that's okay? 20 0 Thank you. Have you had a chance to look 20 A I would see him at the gym from time to 21 at Number 2? 21 time and we would have smalltalk. but that's about 22 A Yes. 22 it. 23 Q Do you have any documents that are 23 Q What gym was that? 24 responsive? 24 A It was the, I think it was called The 25 A No. 25 Fitness Company and it was ;Mated in the 110 Tower United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608539 4 (Pages 13 to 16 Page 13 Page 15 1 across the street from the Broward County I told him about my practice group with the law firm 2 courthouse. 2 and we talked about the possibility of him joining 3 O During the time that you would see him at 3 the firm. 4 the gym and have smalltalk occasionally, did you ever 4 O What cases did he tell you he had? 5 have any conversations before or after the gym or did S A The Jeffrey Epstein cases 6 you ever meet with him for social activity? O Do you know how many there were at that 7 A No. Before he joined the firm, no. Or 7 time? 8 right before he — until right before he joined the 8 A I don't recall 9 firm, no. 9 Q Were there more than three? 10 Q From the time that you met him when he 10 A I believe so, but I'm not positive. 11 worked at Kubickl, Draper, other than seeing him at 11 O Do you know how any of them were 12 the gym occasionally, you had no communication with 12 designated, In other words, how they were named in 13 tern until he joined the firm, is that correct? 13 the court files? 19 A Until soon before he joined the firm, 14 A We didn't discuss that level of detail. 15 correct. 15 O What did he tell you the cases — what did 16 O Can you tell me, as best as you can recall, 16 he tell you was the basis of the cases? 17 how he was recruited or it he was recruited to join 17 A He told me that he represented several 18 the firm? 18 young girls who were - I'm not sure if he used the 19 A He was not recruited to join. Well, I'll 19 word "molested," but that's the word that slicks in 20 tell you what happened, because that's subject to 20 my mind - molested by Jeffrey Epstein. 21 interpretation. 21 O Did you know who Jeffrey Epstein was at 22 I received a large verdict in a sexual 22 that time? 23 abuse case in Palm Beach County and it was in the 23 A No 24 newspaper. Brad called me and said that, I read 24 O Did he explain to you who Jeffmy Epstein 25 about your verdict. And he told me that he had some 25 was? Page 14 1 sexual abuse cases as well. 1 A Briefly. 2 And I told him, I said, Let's have lunch, 2 O How long did you meet, was it just a lunch 3 because I was looking for -- I was always cc the 3 hour? 4 look-Out for lawyers who I would potentially lie to A Correct. 5 work with and bring into the tort practice group at 5 O Did he tell you how far along In discovery 6 the law firm. And so, we had lunch. 6 he was in those cases? 7 O And was anyone else at the lunch? 7 A I don't believe so. I think we just spoke 8 A Nope 8 about them generally. 9 O What was the case that you got the large 9 CI Did he tell you what he thought they were 10 verdict in, if you remember? 10 valued at? 11 A It was called Doe o- Jane Doe. 11 A I don't think he did, no 12 S-i-r-i-w-a-t. 12 O Prior to that lunch, when you would see him 13 O How large was the verdict? 13 at the gym, did you ever know that he worked on those 14 A $24 million. 19 kinds of cases? 15 Q Did Christina Kitterman also work on that 15 A No. I knew that at some point he had left 16 case? 16 Kubicki, Draper and he was in solo practice, but I 17 A She brought the case in. She did very 17 didn't know really anything else about what kind of 18 little on that file, if anything. I did pretty much 18 cases he was handling. 19 all the work. 19 O From your experience with him or observing 20 O So you had lunch with Brad Edwards. Where 20 his work at Kublckl, Draper, did you think he was a 21 did you have lunch? 21 good lamer? 22 A Yolo. 22 A Yes. 23 O Can you tell me what the discussion 23 Q Or, did you have an opinion about his legal 24 consisted of? 24 skills? 25 A He told me a little bit about his cases, l 25 A It was more that I liked the guy and I United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608540 5 (Pages 17 to 20 Page 17 Page 19 1 thought he was really sharp. I didn't have that many 1 Q Did you tell Scott Rothstein that you had 2 dealings with him during that case that I could. you 2 had a meeting with Brad Edwards? 3 know, in order to measure his skills as a lawyer. 3 A I'm sure I did at some point, yeah. 4 0 Was It your impression during the lunch 4 Q Did you recommend that Scott consider 5 meeting with Brad that he might be Interested in 5 offering him a position? 6 joining with the firm, with your firm? 6 A Yes. 7 A At the time, yes. 7 CI What is the next thing you recall about 8 0 Did he tell you he was interested In doing 8 Brad joining the firm, did Brad tell you he made an 9 that? 9 appointment with Scott? 10 A I think he was interested at that point. 10 A I don't recall that, but I do recall he 11 sure. 11 joined the firrn. 12 Q What did you tell him about the prospects 12 Q What month was it or what year and month 13 of his being offered an opportunity to join your 13 was it that you had the lunch meeting? 14 firm? 14 A I don't remember. 15 A I believe I told him I'd -- 15 0 Do you know if Brad Edwards joined the firm 16 MR. KING: Let me interpose an objection 16 In 2009? 17 here. If there were any discussions at all 17 A I don't remember. 18 relating to compensation then we're going to 18 Q Do you know what day Rothstein, Rosenfeldt 19 invoke the financial and privacy privilege. 19 & Adler stopped doing business? 20 MRS. APRIL That is that privilege since I 20 A Well, we found out that there was a problem 21 cannot find it and I've seen it invoked in Mr. 21 on Halloween, October 31st, 2009. The day that the 22 Edwards' deposition. Do you have some authority 22 entity formally stopped doing business I'm not clear 23 for that? 23 on, because a Trustee was appointed and then a 24 MR. KING: It is well-recognized that 24 bankruptcy Trustee was appointed. And I don't know 25 parties have a right to protect financial 25 the exact definition of operations. so I can't tell Page 18 Page 20 1 privilege unless -- financial information unless 1 you any more than that 2 it Is otherwise deemed relevant. And we'll take 2 • Let's use Halloween as close enough. But 3 that position — 3 as a practical matter, you stopped working there on 4 THE WITNESS: Wet hold on a second. Let 4 or about Halloween of 2009? 5 me save you some time, okay? I didn't discuss 5 A I stayed, I stayed around for a few more 6 compensation with him, 6 weeks because I had to try and wind things up in 7 BY MRS. APRIL: 7 transition and everything happened very suddenly and 0 I don't think I even asked you that question B it was very shocking to everybody. So, I stayed 9 yet whichIs why I wanted to go back. 9 around for a couple of weeks until I made 10 A It could have been part of an answer in 10 arrangements to go into solo practice. 11 fairness. 11 O Do you recall testifying at another 12 MRS. APRIL: I think the objection is 12 deposition taken by Charles Lichtman in a case called 13 premature and in the nature of coaching, with 13 in Re: Rothstein, Rosenfeldt 8 Adler," the 14 all due respect. So, could you read my question 14 bankruptcy case? 15 back and maybe you could answer it without 15 A Yes. My deposition, yes. 16 disclosing anything that you think is 16 O Do you remember Mr. Lichtman asking you 17 improper. 17 whether you thought that Brad Edwards had joined the 18 (WHEREUPON, the last question was read 18 firm around June of 2009? 19 back by the court reporter). 19 A I don't recall that specific question and 20 A I told him I was interested in bringing him 20 answer, if you want to show it to me. But if it's in 21 in and that he should make an appointment to come in 21 the deposition transcript, I, obviously, was asked 22 and meet with Rothstein. 22 about it. 23 Q Is that how you kith it when you ended your 23 Q But you don't actually know when he joined? 24 lunch? 24 A I don't recall the specific year that he 25 A I believe so. yes. 75 joined, and I'm being very careful because I'm under United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608541 6 (Pages 21 to 2 4) Page 21 Page 23 1 oath today. documents or communications then show me the 2 Q Yes, you are. document mark it, and I will answer your questions 3 A I really don't know if it was late-O8. if I know the answer. 4 early-'O9 or what the date was. You probably know O Have you talked to Brad Edwards about the 5 about it. though. 5 fact that he has been sued by Jeffrey Epstein In the 6 O Well, If I told you that I had seen 6 case that we're here on today, which is Jeffrey 7 communications between RRA lawyers, Including Brad 7 Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein and Bradley Edwards, et 8 Edwards, that are starting in April of 2009, does 8 al? 9 that refresh your memory at all? 9 A Yes, briefly. 10 A With all due respect, you represent Mr. 10 Q What did he say to you and what did you say 11 Epstein and I'm not going to take anything that you 11 to him? 12 tell me as the truth, especially if you're not going 12 A After he was sued, he told me about the 13 to be showing me documents. So, don't ask me to 13 lawsuit and that he was being sued. That was about 14 confirm communications that you claim to have without 14 all we talked about at that time. And then I 15 showing them to me. rm not doing that. 15 recently spoke with him about my upcoming deposition 16 O You don't know? Your best recollection is 16 for the same purpose I just mentioned to his lawyer, 17 late-013 or sometime in the early part of '09, Is 17 because after I was subpoenaed for deposition I 18 that What I understood your last — 18 called him and told him that I believe that 19 Sir, can l ask you to not — 19 everything that we did at the law firm during the 20 A Yes. 20 pendency and handling of that case is work-product 21 Q tf you want to take a break or make phone 21 privilege and I intend to invoke that privilege and 22 calls or do whatever you're doing on your phone, I'm 22 refuse to answer any questions encompassed by that 23 fine with that, but I would appreciate your giving us 23 privilege unless ordered to do so by the judge. 24 your attention. 24 CI You say "that case." What case are you 25 A I'm sorry. I just told someone to slop 25 referring to, sir? Page 22 Page 24 I testing me, to leave me alone. 1 A What do you mean that case? What was your question? 2 O You just made a statement that Included a 3 O You are under oath and this is testimony. 3 reference, to quote, that case. 4 MRS. APRIL: You want to read back the 4 THE WITNESS: Can you read back my answer, 5 last question? 5 please? 6 (WHEREUPON, the requested testimony was 6 (WHEREUPON, the requested testimony was 7 read back by the court reporter). 7 read back by the court reporter). 8 THE WITNESS: I don't have a specific 8 A To answer your question - and I apologize • 9 recollection as I sit here today. If I gave a 9 I was referring to the lawsuits against Jeffrey 10 more exact answer under oath in my deposition in 10 Epstein that Brad Edwards was handling both before he 11 a Trustee case then that was my sworn testimony 11 joined the RRA firm and after 12 at the time and it is what it is. 12 Q Earlier in your testimony you mentioned 13 BY MRS. APRIL: 13 that you couldn't remember the exact style of those 14 O You made a comment a moment ago that you 14 suits or the exact amount, the number of suits. Were 15 don't trust me because I represent Mc Epstein. Can 15 there additional suits filed against Jeffrey Epstein 16 I ask you what that has to do with whether — Have 16 by your firm after Brad Edwards joined the firm, 17 you ever met me before today? 17 whenever that was? 18 A It has nothing to do with you personally or 18 A I don't recall, because I had very little 19 even Mr. Epstein. You are taking my deposition in 19 involvement in those cases at all. They were Brad's 20 litigation that I am not a party to. 20 cases when he joined the firm and they remained 21 Q That's right. 21 Brad's cases after he joined the firm. I was merely 22 A I'm not going to take any lawyers word 22 the head of the Tort Litigation Division and in an 23 that they've seen something that they haven't even 23 administrative capacity. I don't think I did much of 24 shown me to use that as the basis for asking me 24 anything in any of those Epstein cases, and that's 25 questions. ff you want to ask me about specific 25 why I don't remember or I cannot tell you about the United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608542 7 (Pages 25 to 28) Page 25 Page 27 details you're asking 1 A I don't. but I'm happy to look at what O Your position is: If you did talk to Brad 2 you're refernng to if you would like to show it to Edwards about cases against Jeffrey Epstein during 3 me. the time that you both worked at RRA that they're 4 O I'm going to draw your attention to Page subject, those conversations, to a work-product 5 131 and 132 of the deposition of Russell Adler taken 6 privilege, right? 6 October 28th, 2010 by Charles Lichtman. 7 A Absolutely. 7 Rather than read it to you, because that 8 Q Have you read the complaint or the amended 8 would make the record long, I'm going to ask you to 9 complaint filed by Jeffrey Epstein against Brad 9 start looking at: "Did you have any involvement in 10 Edwards? 10 11 A No 11 MR. KING: Let me look over your shoulder. 12 O Have you read Brad Edwards' deposition 12 You don't have an extra copy, do you? 13 given in that case? 13 MRS. APRIL: Not that's not marked up. 14 A Are you talking about in this case? 14 A I've read the portions that you asked me to 15 O In this case? 15 read and, now, I recall a little more detail. 16 A No 16 0 Do you remember Scott Rothstein calling you 17 0 Did Brad Edwards talk to you at all about 17 and Mr. Edwards and Gary Farmer and perhaps others Is questions he was asked during his deposition in this 18 into your office - 19 case? 19 A Into his office? 20 A No. 20 Q - into his office to ask you questions? 21 Q You mentioned that you had these couple of 21 A Yes. 22 conversations with Mr. Edwards concerning this case 22 CI And you recall testifying - now that you've 23 once when he told you he had been sued by Jeffrey 23 looked at this - that you wanted to know about 24 Epstein and then more recently when you said you 24 whether or not a particular statute applied to a 25 were — you told him you were going to be deposed? 25 sexual abuse case? Page 26 Page 2E 1 A Correct. 1 A I remember exactly what I said — 2 0 flat did he say to you in response to your 2 MR. KING: Let me interpose an objection. 3 remarks? 3 I didn't mean to cut you off. I want you to 4 A He just agreed with me that any questions 4 complete your answer. 5 you ask me about any communications, thoughts, 5 A I am not sure if at this point because of 6 discussions or, basically, anything else we did while 6 my testimony in the Trustee case it is still 7 at the RRA firm handling those cases is work-product 7 work-product or not work-product. Suffice it to say, privilege. That was it. 8 I do remember asking (sic) the questions and 9 0 In your view, was the communication that 9 answering them to the best of my ability in my 10 was held between you and Scott Rothstein, Brad 10 deposition on the pages that you referenced and I 11 Edwards and several other attorneys at a conference 11 stand by that testimony. Although, as to this case, 12 in Mr. Rothstein's office where boxes were in the 12 I am unsure as to whether or not that is work-product 13 room from the Epstein cases, was that conversation 13 privilege. 14 privileged? Do you remember there being such a 14 MR. KING: And we would assert it to the 15 conversation, let me ask you that? 15 extent that you intend to pursue it. 16 A I'm thinking. I remember a conference in 16 MRS. APRIL: I'm sorry. I didn't 17 Rothstein's office soon before -- soon before October 17 understand your — 18 31st sometime I think during that month. I do not 18 MR. KING: We would Intend to assert the 19 recall boxes from the Epstein case being present. If 19 work-product doctrine to the extent that you 20 they were, I didn't — I wasn't aware of that at the 20 intend to pursue it beyond the question you just 21 time. But if it was about that case. then it's 21 asked relating to whether or not his testimony 22 absolutely work-product privilege. 22 was his testimony. 23 0 Do you remember testifying about the 23 A And I will point out that that testimony 24 subject matter of the discussion in your deposition 24 was given in a deposition where I was being sued by 25 taken by Mr. Uchbnan in the bankruptcy case? 25 the Trustee that stands in the shoes of RRA. And United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608543 8 (Pages 29 to 32 Page 29 Page 31 1 it's my understanding that. by order of Judge Rey, 1 A Frankly, I don't remember how I recalled 2 all privileges, work-product, attorney-client are 2 that they were Epstein files. I mean, do I 3 preserved and that's catty I am not comfortable 3 specifically recall looking at the labels on it or 4 testifying openly in this deposition about those 4 maybe there was writing on the boxes that they were 5 dealings and conversations in light of who the 5 In? I just don't recall those details. I'm sorry 6 parties are in this case. 6 O When you're talking about boxes, are you 7 In other words. I still think there is a 7 referring to standard sort of banker's box that law 8 work-product privilege as to Mr. Epstein. And. if 8 firms keep files in? 9 I'm wrong, then the circuit judge in this case can 9 A Yes. 10 tell me so and order me to tee you more. 10 Q Do you know whether there were a large 11 Q You mentioned that there was an order of 11 number of boxes or a small number? 12 Judge Rey In connection wtth the case where the 12 A I don't remember whether or not I counted 13 bankruptcy Trustee sued you and your wife was sued in 13 the boxes. I probably didn't. 14 that case, too, right? 14 O Do you think there were more than two? 15 A Yes. 15 A Probably. 16 O Do you know specifically when that order 16 Q Do you think there could have been as many 17 was entered whore Judge Roy said that? 17 as 19? 18 A I just have a recollection of knowing that 18 A I really don't know. I am not comfortable 19 in the main bankruptcy case, of which the adversary 19 even giving an approximation under oath concerning 20 case against me was an offshoot. In the main 20 the number, the specific number of boxes. 21 bankruptcy case there was a ruling that the Trustee 21 O So you have no idea whether there were - 22 stood in the shoes of the law km and that all 22 Do you know how they were set up in the roan; were 23 privileges were preserved. because I guess that's 23 they on the table, on the floor, on the credenza? 24 what happens when a Trustee lakes over a law firm. 24 A I just remember seeing boxes on the 75 Cl Who represented you in that case? 25 floor. Page 30 Page 32 1 A In the bankruptcy adversary case? 1 Q Were they stacked up on the floor or were 2 O Yes. Did Mr. Haddad represent you there as 2 they spread around so that one could — 3 well? 3 A I do not have that level of detail in my 4 A Mr. Haddad represented me in that and I was 4 recollection. I'm sorry. 5 also represented by a few other lawyers. 5 O Were you surprised that the boxes were In 6 O Do you know who they were? 6 Scott's office? 7 A Jason Slatkin, S-I-a-t-k-i-n, represented 7 A I was either surprised or perplexed, or 8 me for most of the case. Before him, Tom Messana, 8 both. 9 M-e-s-s-a-n-a, represented me. 9 O Do you recall if anybody who was in 10 O Well, let me ask you this: Now that you've 10 attendance at that time looked at any papers In the 11 looked at these couple of pages, irrespective of 11 boxes, Including Scott? 12 work-product privilege, do you recall that Scott had 12 A During that meeting? 13 Epstein files in his office at the meeting you 13 O Yes. 19 described? 14 A I don't think anyone — I don't recall 15 A I recalled it at the prior deposition that 15 seeing anyone pull anything out of boxes and start 16 you have shown me and I now recall it a little better 16 looking through files at that meeting. We sat at a 17 from reading it 17 table and there was a discussion. 18 Q So there were Epstein boxes in Scott's 18 CI Now, I'm a little unclear about the 19 room? 19 position you're taking on work-product or whether 20 A Apparently, in his office. Apparently, 20 it's waived or whether it's preserved, so I'm going 21 there were and that's what I testified to in my prior 21 to ask you some questions. And if you think there's 22 deposition. 22 some privilege, I'm sure you'll toll me. 23 O Today rm asking you, do you remember 23 A Okay. How did you know they wore Epstein files? 24 O Did Scott Rothstein tell you during that That's a different question. It wasn't asked before. 25 meeting that the questions that he was asking you had United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608544 9 (Pages 33 to 36) Page 33 Page 35 1 something to do with the Epstein cases? 1 me. Strike that. 2 MR. KING. We'll assert the work-product 2 Do you recall, did you testify — Since 3 doctrine to any conversations occurring during 3 October 31st, 2009, have you testified In any other 4 the course of that meeting. 4 lawsuits, you, as a witness? 5 A But as to whether they pertain to Epstein 5 A No. Other than the adversary case against 6 at all — 6 me no. 7 MR. KING: Because even the failure to Q Have you settled that case? a associate a particular statement with a 8 A Yes. 9 conversation could have significance from a 9 Q So let me be clear on this, because I do 10 work-product standpoint, so we'll assert the 10 not know that it would be fruitful to go through a 11 work-product doctrine. 11 dozen or more questions that you are going to claim 12 A And so will I. I'll leave it up to the 12 work-product to: It's your position that anything 13 judge, although you do have my sworn testimony from 13 that occurred during the time that RRA existed where 14 the other case in front of you. 14 you talked to other lawyers in the firm in any way, 15 El Let me ask you this: Without answering the 15 shape, or form about Jeffrey Epstein Is subject to 16 question, because this will make a difference as to 16 work-product privilege? 17 whether we need to come back after the judge rules. 17 A Correct That's my understanding 18 A Yes. 18 0 So I'm going to reserve the right to ask 19 Q Do you know the answer to that question? 19 you those questions when we have a ruling from the 20 In other words, you're not telling it to me, but do 20 court. We believe there's been a waiver, and you're 21 you remember if he said that at all or are you 21 telling me you don't know or you're not sure there's 22 allowed to tell me that? 22 been a waiver? 23 A I'm just saying that, as I sit here today, 23 A As I understand waivers of the work-product 24 I don't have a clear recollection of that specific 24 doctrine, I am personally of the opinion that there 25 matter. I think it might be covered in my answers in 25 has not been a waiver at all. My prior deposition Page 34 Page 36 1 the prior deposition from %nal you showed me. I have 1 was compelled testimony that was given by way of a 2 not reviewed the entire deposition, for the record. 2 subpoena in a case in which I was a defendant and I 3 You directed me to two pages of my prior deposition 3 had to answer those questions when asked by a 4 and those are the only two pages that I locked at. 4 bankruptcy Trustee who stood in the shoes of the law 5 And that deposition, I think we said this already. 5 firm. I don't think that that constitutes any waiver 6 was taken on -- 6 of the work-product privilege, especially as to the 7 Q Six months ago almost October? 7 person who was a defendant in those underlying 8 A Sur months ago. October 28th. 2010. 8 lawsuits and that's the person who you represent in 9 Q A week short of six months. 9 this case. 10 Have you over read the transcript of the 10 So that's my understanding, that's my 11 deposition that you gave In that case on October 28, 11 position that I'm taking. If the circuit judge 12 2010? 12 disagrees with me and he enters an order, I will do 13 A Soon after I got a copy of the transcript. 13 what I'm ordered to do by the judge. But I say that 14 I did 14 in an abundance of caution as well and in good faith. 15 Q Do you recall sitting here today who else 15 of course. 16 was In the room? At that time you said the Tort 16 0 You're not saying that the subpoena that 17 Group, including Brad Edwards, Gary Farmer and maybe 17 was delivered to you by giving it to your lawyer in 18 Stove Jaffe. Do you recall whether Steve Jaffe was 18 this case is less of a subpoena, are you? 19 there? 19 You said you were compelled in that case 20 A I have no greater recollection today than I 20 because you got a subpoena. Are you treating this 21 did at the lime of my deposition. So if that's what 21 subpoena differently? This is a lawsuit. 22 I said in my deposition, that's the best answer I 22 A I know its a lawsuit 23 can — that's better than the answer that I can give 23 Q We issued a subpoena. Do you feel you were 24 you today. to tell you the truth. 24 not subpoenaed to testify truthfully and fully today? 25 Q On Page 132 of that deposition - Excuse 25 A I don't know what you're talking about. I United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608545 10 (Pages 37 to 40) Page 37 Page 39 1 know what a subpoena is. I am here testifying under 1 lunch, do you know if Brad Edwards joined the firm? 2 oath. 2 A Yes. 3 0 Pursuant to the subpoena? 3 0 Do you know whether it was a period of a 4 A Pursuant to a subpoena. I do not have the 4 long stretch of time before he joined the firm or was 5 documents that you are requesting. If they exist, 5 It a month or six months or a year? Can you tell me 6 they're in the hands of the bankruptcy Trustee, so 6 approximately how long after you had that lunch that 7 talk to him. 7 he joined the firm? O Sir, thank you. I know how to talk to and 8 A I don't recall. I'm sorry. 9 who to talk to. 9 O Was it a year? 10 A Okay. ' 0 A I don't recall. I'm sorry. 11 O My question to you is: You made a 11 Q You have no recollection? 12 statement a moment ago that you testified in a 12 A It was less than a year. 13 certain way on October 28th, 2010 because you were 13 O All right. 14 compelled by virtue of a subpoena in a case where you 34 A Okay 15 were a party and the bankruptcy Trustee - you were 15 Q Did you meet with him on any other 16 required to give testimony. 16 occasions for any reason to talk about a case, for 17 Do you think that the subpoena that was 17 social reasons or otherwise, between the lunch at 18 served today Is any different? Do you think you're 18 Yolo's and his walking into the firm and saying I 19 not required to give testimony when asked? 19 work here now? 20 A In the sense that I am required to give 20 A I don't believe so. 21 pursuant to a subpoena, it's the same thing. It's 21 O Did he call you, e-mail you, or otherwise 22 Just that the parties are very different in this case 22 communicate with you between the time of that lunch 23 than they were in the adversary case against me. 23 and his becoming employed by RRA? 24 Q Sir, you've been practicing how long? 24 A I don't recall. 25 A 24-and-a-half years. 25 Q You don't recall. Do you have In your Page 38 Page 1 O In 24-anda-half years you have served 1 possession anywhere e -mails, hand notes written on 2 subpoenas on witnesses and parties? 2 napkins or otherwise that would refresh your 3 A Yes. 3 recollection about the answer to that question? 4 Q Is there some distinction on whether or not 4 A I might have copies of some e-mails. But, 5 a person has to testify truthfully and fully 5 if I do, I don't think I have any e-mail attachments 6 depending on whether they're a party and who is suing 6 and I would certainly have no record of phone calls I 7 who? 7 don't think. 8 A I have told you my position in this case 8 O When you say you might have some e-mails, 9 very clearly as to the reasons behind my assertion of 9 is that because you maintained e-rnails on a personal 10 the work-product privilege and my reasons why I don't 10 computer at home or are these e-mails that belonged 11 believe it has been waived. Any further questions 11 to the firm that you retrieved? 12 from you about my serving subpoenas and what 12 A I think I took a copy of some e-mails 13 subpoenas mean, quite honestly, is badgering and is 13 before I physically left RRA. 14 a waste of time. And I would request that you move 14 Q Did you review those e-mails prior to 15 on and ask me other questions, because this is just 15 coming here today to see if any of them were 16 absolutely — there's no purpose behind this 16 responsive to my subpoena? 17 questioning other than to badger me. 17 A No. 18 O Let's go back to your conversations with 18 Q And that's because you believed they were 19 Brad Edwards before he joined the firm. 19 not or you didn't think of it, or what? 20 A Yes 20 A Didn't think of it, to be honest with 21 Q I had asked you questions before. Let's 21 you 22 pick up there. 22 CI Did you give Brad Edwards your e-mail 23 You had a lunch with Brad Edwards sometime 23 address at some point before he joined the firm? 24 before he joined the firm and you're not sure when 24 A I- 25 that was, but can you tell me this: Following your 25 O Did you hand him a business card? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608546 11 (Pages 41 to 44 Page 41 Page 43 1 A I don't speci0cally recall doing that, but 1 A The ultimate tiring decision would have 2 any lawyer can find any other lawyer's e-mail address 2 been made by Scott Rothstein, as would the 3 these days. 3 compensation. The benefits part would have been 4 Q Well, did you send any a-mails to Brad? 4 handled by either Debra or someone else who worked in 5 A Just so we're dear here, the requests in 5 the administrative part of the firm. 6 the subpoena In the duces tecum section keep asking 6 Q Was that Debra Villages? 7 about written communications. 7 A Yes. 8 Q And you think an e-mall Is not written? 8 O Did Brad Edwards tall you prior to meeting 9 A That is like some esoteric Issue that I 9 Stott Rothstein or, excuse me, prior to Joining RRA 10 really don't waste my time thinking about. Written 10 whet ho was or had been earning in prior years? 11 communications to me mean letters. notes, handwritten 11 A I don't think I discussed that with him. 12 stuff, Panted, typed, things like that 12 O Did he give you any kind of a ballpark 13 Q If you look at the subpoena on Page 5 13 about what ho would need to make it worth his whilo 14 there's something called "definitions." Number 2, 14 to move to the firm? 15 written Communications. 15 A Thal was not my issue to discuss with hut). 16 Sir, did you read the instructions in 16 So. no. 17 definitions before you reviewed the subpoena? 17 O He didn't offer that Information to you? 18 A I don't recall 18 A Gratuitously? Voluntarily? No, I don't 19 Q If I say to you that the instructions on 19 think he did. 20 this subpoena, that you're choosing not to look at. 20 O But he did contact you to say he might be 21 says: 21 Interested in joining up with you? 22 "Number 2. Written communications means any 22 A I've already answered that question. 23 documents evidencing communications between you and 23 MR. HADDAD: Object to the form. 24 another person or persons of any kind," would that 24 MR. KING: Objection. 25 include an e-mail? 25 BY MRS. APRIL: Page 42 1 A Let's put it this way, I will agree to go 1 O As part of your preliminary conversation, 2 back and look at the back-up t took to see if I have 2 is It your testimony there was no discussion 3 anything that's responsive and that I do not feel was 3 whatsoever about the range of money he would need to 4 privileged. And if l come across any such e-mails. I 4 move to the firm? 5 will print those and produce those to you with a copy 5 A The only discussion that I might have had 6 to Brad's lawyer. 6 with him in that regard was to tell him that I need 7 O And, sir, if you determine that they are 7 to get him in to see Rothstein so he could work out 8 privileged, will you let us know that they exist so 8 the details to see, you know, with respect to numbers 9 that we can deal with that at such time as the 9 and money and all of that, because that was something 10 privileged question is ruled upon? 10 that Rothstein did. I had no eivoNement in any of 11 A Sure. 1) the finances of the firm or salaries or compensation 12 O Thank you. 12 other than, of course. my own. 13 I think you've testified, and I know that 13 O When you say you had no Involvement, do you 14 Mr. King has objected, but I think your testimony to 14 mean not only that you didn't determine what salaries 15 a question I had not yet gotten to was that you 15 or compensation people got but that you didn't know 16 didn't know, but let me make it clear. Do you know 16 what anyone else got? Is that clear or do you want 17 what salary and benefits were offered to Brad Edwards 17 me to rephrase h? 18 when he joined RRA? 18 A That's basically true, yeah. It wasn't my 19 A No. 19 concern. 20 O Do you know what salary and/or benefits he 20 O I think you offered this Information In an 21 received when he did join RRA? 21 earlier answer, that you ware the head of a 22 A No. Other people handled that part of 22 department or a group of tort lawyers, am I 23 It. 23 correct? 24 O What people were those people? Who handled 24 A Correct. 25 it? 25 O What did you call that department? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608547 12 (Pages 45 to 48) Page 45 Page 47 1 A The Tort Practice Group. I hesitate. 1 know? 2 because we also did class-action and mass tort. 2 A Yeah. 3 0 All right 3 0 Did he ask you to produce any financials or 4 A That fell under the umbrella of tort. 4 documentation as far as what your book of business 5 0 How many lawyers did you have working in 5 was? 6 that group when the firm ended, broke up? 6 A Yes. But when I came to the firm it was 7 A When the firm ended, I think there were 7 very different, under very different circumstances 8 nine of us. 8 than when Brad Edwards came to the firm. 9 Q And Mr. Edwards was one of the nine? 9 Q How so? 10 A Correct. 10 A Because I had an up-and-going law firm with 11 0 So your testimony Is, you didn't know how 11 me and I think it was two other lawyers. I literally 12 much money any of those lawyers had been paid that 12 closed my office and Rothstein hired my entire staff. 13 year or any prior time? 13 And I hesitate, because I'm not sure if every single 14 A Other than myself', 14 staff member came over. I think a couple of them 15 0 Of course, other than yourself. 35 might not have come over, but it was, you know, it 16 A That's correct. That was not my function 16 involved copying machines and it involved all kinds 17 in the firm to know that or to deal with that. 17 of other issues. And, yes. I did give him financials 18 Q Did you ever make any suggestions or 18 when I joined for I think two years. 19 recommendations to Mr. Rothstein about the work of 19 Ct Did your existing firm merge into the 20 the — 20 Rothstein, Rosenfeidt 8 Adler firm? 21 You're the 9th, right? I mean, there was 21 A I don't know the definition, the legal 22 eight, plus you in the group? 22 definition of the term "merger," so I am reluctant to 23 A Correct. 23 say yes or no, we did or did not merge. But suffice 24 0 — recommendations about the compensation 24 it to say, I closed my doors at my law firm and my 25 or bonuses that you thought should be paid to any of 25 firm became the Tort Practice Group of RRA. Page 46 Page 1 those who worked In your group? 1 CI When you joined RRA did you, as part of 2 A I really wasn't privy to that information 2 that transaction, sign over your then-existing 3 That was something that Rothstein handled. 3 receivables to the new firm, RRA? 4 tit Does that mean, no, you didn't ever 4 A Assign my receivables? Well, all of my 5 recommend or suggest a bonus or salary for one of 5 cases were contingency fee cases, so there were no 6 your people? 6 receivables, per se. There was certainly — I think 7 A I think that is correct. 7 a better way to put it is that the RRA firm 8 0 Do you know if Stott Rothstein or anyone at 8 substituted in as counsel on all of my pending 9 RRA required Mr. Edwards to produce financials or 9 lawsuits and there were probably a few, there were 10 some information about the money he had made in the 10 some lawsuits that were carved out of the deal that 11 prior years before joining the firm? 11 remained. The fees from which, if they ever came, 12 A I don't know 12 were my fees. 13 Q You don't know? He didn't tell you that 13 Q When you Joined the firm and you brought 14 was being asked of him? 14 cases to RRA that were ongoing cases, did RRA 15 A He didn't tell me one way or the other and 15 reimburse you or 16 I never asked him about that. 16 Your prior firm, what was It called, the 11 0 When he joined the firm, you had been at 17 one you brought over? 18 the firm — in 2009, how long had you been there? 18 A Kamkin, Adler. P.A. I believe 19 A I started in February 2005. 19 was the name of the firm when I closed it and joined 20 Q When you joined, Scott Rothstein is the one 20 RRA in February of 2005. 21 who determined your compensation? 21 0 i take It you had Incurred some 22 A Yes. Well, we talked about it and we made 22 out-of-pocket expenses, costs in those cases when you 23 an agreement 23 joined RRA? 24 Q But he was the one who made the decision 24 A Yes. 25 from the point of view of the firm as far as you 25 Q Did RRA reimburse you or Karmin 8 Adler, United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608548 13 (Pages 49 to 5 2) Page 49 Page 51 1 P.A. for money that had already been spent on cases 1 Q — so that you could confer with him about 2 that became theirs? 2 cases? 3 A I know that they did when those cases were 3 A Well, what would have happened was, he 4 settled or resolved. I would get a check cut-back 4 would have provided a case list at some point in time 5 for the costs that I had outlald on those cases S and those cases would have been inputted into our 6 before I joined the firm. 6 case management system at RRA. So. there would have 7 If you're asking: Did they write me checks 7 been a case list that was retrievable by a lawyer. 8 from the very beginning for monies I was 8 Q Did those cases not need to go through a 9 out-of-pocket for? I dent think they did. 9 conflict process before he joined the firm? 10 O In the case of Brad Edwards, if you know, 10 A Yes, they dd. 11 were you aware that some of the cases he brought over 11 O Were you involved with that at all? 12 that there had been costs incurred by him? He was a 12 A No. 13 solo practitioner, I think you said, before he joined 13 Q Was Remotion who oversaw that at your 19 RRA, 14 firm? 15 A I probably assumed it at the time. but I 15 A What person? 16 don't think we discussed 16 O If there Is such a person? 17 Q You don't know one way or another whether 17 A There were people who performed conflict 18 RRA reimbursed him for those costs or how they were 18 cheeks. I don't remember specific names of people 19 handled? 19 who did it, but I know forefeet they were done and 20 A No, because that would go back to the terms 20 they were done before an RRA firm file number would 21 of his joining the firm which was not my 21 be assigned to the file. In other words, you would 22 Involvement. 22 not get a firm foie number until the conflict 23 Q Do you know whether he had - he, being Brad 23 checking process was done. 24 Edwards - a written contract with the firm whon he 24 O Were those people administrative people or 25 joined? 25 attorneys that did this process? Page 50 Page 5:; 1 A I don't know. 1 A That did the conflict checks? 2 Q Dld you when you joined and you brought 2 Administrative people or secretarial. 3 over your firm, Hamiln & Adler, P.A.? 3 CI Do you know who they reported to or at 4 A A formal written contract? The answer is: 4 least at the highest level who was the highest level No, we did not. There might have been some e-mails, 5 administrative person in the firm? 6 some checklists, stuff like that. But again, the 6 A Debra Villegas 7 circumstances under which I closed my firm and moved 7 Q Have you ever discussed the case that 8 everything over to RRA was very different than hiring 8 you're here on today, Epstein versus Rothstein, with 9 one lawyer who was in solo practice at the time. 9 Debra Villegas? 10 Q Did Mr. Edwards bring over cases besides 10 A No. I have not seen or spoken with her 11 cases against Jeffrey Epstein? 11 since before October 31st, 2009. 12 A Yes 12 0 So, Brad Edwards joins the firm. You're 13 Q Do you know or is there an inventory 13 not sure exactly when that was, but he came alone, 14 someplace that Is written that describes the cases 14 right? He didn't bring any other lawyers? 15 that were transferred over? 15 A Correct 16 A Yes. there was. 16 0 Did he sit anywhere in proximity to your 17 CI And — 17 office; same floor? 18 A But I do not have that or have access to 18 A I'm trying to think where his office was. 19 that. 19 Al one point he was on the same floor. And then 20 Q At the time that the firm was still going 20 after that, he got moved I believe up to another 21 and Mr. Edwards joined — 21 floor or down to another floor. 22 A Yes. 22 Q Was that, was there a reason for that that 23 Q — did you have access to that inventory at 23 you're aware of? 24 that point — 24 A Yes. 25 A Yes. 25 Q What was it? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608549 14 (Pages 53 to 56) Page 53 Page SS 1 A After Brad joined the firm some additional 1 software that was used to manage the scanned images 2 space got built out, new space for us, and I think it 2 at RRA. That's not to say that some documents were 3 was on the 15th Floor. Brad was moved down there 3 not stored in QTASK for one purpose or another or for 4 when that space was completed. 4 one case or another, but the firm officially used a 5 O Were other members of your group of nine 5 different software product to manage its scanned 6 moved to that floor? 6 Images 7 A Yes. 7 O What product was that? 8 O And you weren't? 8 A That was called Fortis, F-o-r-t-i-s. 9 A Correct. O When Bradley Edwards joined the firm were 10 O Because you didn't want to move? 10 his case files brought over to RRA's offices? Paper 11 A I liked my office. 11 files, I mean. 12 O Fair enough. I understand the firm 12 A Were they physically brought over to RRA's 13 utilized a system that's been referred to as QTASK? 13 offices? I don't think I knew that at the time, 14 A Yes 14 because the idea was if he was not paperless that all 15 Q Can you tell me what QTASK is? 15 of his files be imaged and brought into our image 16 A QTASK is a web-based project management and 16 management system at the firm, because we were a 17 collaboration tool. 17 papedess law firm. But did he physically bring over 18 O Old you have anything to do with the 18 all of his files? I don't know the answer to that 19 development or marketing of that tool? 19 question. 20 A Yes. 20 O So when you say "we were a paperless law 21 Q Can you tell me when that started? 21 firm," using Fortis, for example, as you said — 22 A Approximately 2007. 22 A Yes. 23 CI Does somebody own proprietary rights In 23 • — you'd have images of documents in lieu 24 QTASK? 24 of paper copies? 25 A What do you mean by proprietary rights? 25 A All files were supposed to be imaged or Page 54 1 O Copyright, patent? 1 scanned, but there were exceptions to that. In other 2 A I don't know the details of that. 2 words, some lawyers still used paper files over there 3 O Do you own any part of WASH? 3 for various reasons and I cannot swear under oath 4 A No. that every single file was, in fact. scanned or 5 O Have you ever? 5 imaged. 6 A No. f. O Do you know whether Mr. Edwards' files were 7 0 To your knowledge, did RRA own the rights scanned or imaged when or about the time he joined 8 to use or market ()TASK? a the firm? 9 A Did we own the rights to use or market? 9 A I'm sure some of them were, but I cannot 10 Scott Rothstein was an investor in QTASK personally. 10 tell you if all of them were You would have to ask 11 Our firm was allowed to use QTASK. As far as 11 him 12 marketing QTASK, I was more of an evangelist than a 12 O Now, you referred earlier to the Epstein 13 salesperson. I would tell people about it and I 13 cases. Those cases, did you ever actually have an 14 would show it to them. And I also participated in 14 occasion to look at the cases; in other words, 15 the design and specifications of particular features 15 whatever file he had whether it was scanned or in 16 and user interfaces in QTASK. 16 Paned 17 Q Is QTASK a tool that would allow the office 17 A Are you asking me d I ever sat and looked 18 to have gone papertess? That term has been used 18 through any of the Epstein files whether in paper or 19 sometimes when talking about firms. Is it in lieu of 19 digital form? 20 paper that you would use QTASK? 20 O Yeah. 21 A QTASK is or can be used to store and manage 21 A I don't think I did, no. 22 scanned images. 22 O What about PACER did you ever use the 23 O Did your tort group use it for that 23 public access system that provides access to Federal 24 purpose? 24 court filings to look at any of them? 25 A For the most part no There was other 25 A No United Reporting, Inc 954-525-2221 EFTA00608550 15 (Pages 57 to 60) Page 57 Page 5' 1 Q Do you use PACER now to look at any court 1 A Commercial litigation 2 filings? 2 O Was she at the firm at the ono? 3 A I don't practice in Federal court. so the 3 A Yeah. 4 answer Is no. I don't even know how to use PACER. 4 O The case I think you've mentioned before, 5 O Is it fair to say and I don't know if 5 that was the $24 million verdict? 6 you'll think this is work-product or not, but I'll 6 A Yes. Thank you for mentioning that ? ask you and you'll tell me - Is It lair to say that 7 again. 8 the information that you got about the Epstein cases 8 O That originated through her? 9 was given to you by other people rather than by 9 A She brought it in. She knew the mother of 10 first-hand observation of documents? 10 the girl who was molested. 11 A Any information I got about the Epstein 11 O Do you know where she's working now, Mrs. 12 cases would have come from Brad Edwards. Can I swear 12 Mennen, If she's working? 13 that t never looked at one piece of paper or looked 13 A Yes. 14 at one deposition from that case, no. I might have. 14 O Where is that? 15 but I don't remember specifically looking al any 15 A She's in private practice. 16 particular document or deposition. 16 Q Her own? 17 I never had anything to do vAth those cases 17 A Yes. 18 except from an administrative viewpoint and I did 18 O I mean, I'm in private practice, too, but I 19 attend I think MO depositions in that case. but I 19 work at Fowler. White, Burnett. 20 did not participate in taking them. 20 A I know 21 CI Was one of them the brother of Jeffrey 21 O But she's on her own? 22 Epstein, Mark? 22 A Yes. 23 A Yes. in New York City. 23 O Do you know if she received any 24 O Why did you attend? 24 compensation for being the person who brought in that 25 A Because I wanted to go up to New York any 25 piece of litigation? Page 58 Page 60 1 way. Brad was there and I just showed up for an hour A What, the $24 million verdict? 2 or something like that. It wasn't very long. 2 O Yes. 3 O The other one you attended, was that also 3 A She probably received nothing, because we 4 In New York? 4 didn't Wiest any money on it. We didn't collect 5 A No, that was Jeffrey Epstein. It was his 5 the verdict. The guy filed bankruptcy. 6 deposition or a part of his deposition, I should 6 Q Now. I want to go back to the request in say. 7 the subpoena because I'm not entirely clear now 8 O And why did you attend that one? 8 whothor or not you don't have any responsive 9 A Because it was being taken up on Australian 9 documents to the seven categories or whether some of 10 Avenue in West Palm Beach. I was up there for 10 them might be contained in the e-mails that you had 11 hearings that morning I believe and, again, I just 11 forgotten to look at. 12 wanted to stop in and see what was going on. I think 12 Did you previous, prior to today look to 13 there were two other lawyers there. Brad and someone 13 see whether you had any written communications, I'm 14 else. 14 going to include e-mails In that, between you and Mr. 15 O Something I forgot to ask you before. When 15 Rothstein about Mr. Edwards? 16 you were talking about the lawyers that were in your 16 A I think the only documents I would have. as 17 group when RRA ended you said there were nine. Was 17 you define "documents'. would bee mails. And. no, I 18 Christina Kitterman in your group? 18 did not look. but I will 19 A No 19 O I think I've already asked you this, but 20 O Had she been in your group before? 20 just so it will be clear. Number 4, I had asked 21 A No. In the Tort Group? 21 about written communications to or from Mr. Edwards 22 O In the Tort Group? 22 prior to his becoming an employee of RRA. And you 23 A No 23 said those may be in the e-mails or not? 24 O What kind of lamer, what kind of practice 24 A If I have them. I wall either produce them 25 did she have? 25 or I will describe them and invoke privilege it I United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608551 16 (Pages 61 to 64) Page 61 Page 63 1 feel ifs applicable. 1 Cl Regarding a purported settlement. not 2 O Now, if It's a communication to or from Mr. 2 necessarily a settlement 3 Edwards prior to his becoming an employee of RRA, 3 A I don't think any of the cases had settled 4 what privilege would you be invoking? 4 by the time — by Halloween of 2009. S A I don't think there is a privilege for that 5 a So the answer Is: You don't think there 6 particular category. Well, none that I can think of 6 would be 7 unless privacy — 7 A in fact, I'm virtually certain none of them 8 MR. KING: From your standpoint, financial 8 had settled. And if none of them had settled, there 9 privacy might be — 9 would be no such e-mails at least involving me. 10 MRS. APRIL: Are you taking the position 10 O Have you heard that Mr. Rothstein told 11 that if I am looking fora job with a firm and I 11 third parties, persons not in your firm, that there 12 send an e-mail to this fellow saying, Hey, I 12 were settlements that had occurred or were about to 13 gotta have six figures, big six figures, that 13 occur with Mr. Epstein at some point? 14 would be somehow a privileged communication? 14 A At some point in time did I hear it or — 15 MR. KING: in a certain type of case the 15 Yes. :6 privilege may be overridden by other interests, 16 CIA might have read it in the paper at some s 17 but in this particular case we continue to 17 time in 2010, but never, ever before Halloween of 18 assert the privilege for the reasons that Mr. 18 2009 or even on Halloween of 20O9. 19 Scarab set forth in the earlier deposition. 19 Q So you don't have any documents that would 20 There's absolutely nothing that would 20 describe these purported settlements? 21 outweigh — there is nothing of interest in this 21 A I knew nothing of any purported settlements 22 case from the defendants perspective, from our 22 at all before 2010. 23 standpoint that would outweigh the interests of 23 0 And the way you learned about it was 24 our client with regard to financial privacy. 24 through the press or just rumor or something? 25 MRS. APRIL: We have a non-party witness 25 A I think what I read in the newspaper. Page 62 Page 64 1 here today, so I don't want to waste his time 1 0 You don't believe everything you read in 2 with this silliness. 2 the newspaper, do you? 3 MR. KING: You just asked me what our 3 A That's correct. I do not. 4 position was and I recounted it. 4 O Did you look to see If you had any 5 MRS. APRIL: I know, but I just wanted to 5 documents, this is also part of Number 5, concerning 6 understand that you're saying your guy had some 6 the financing of any litigation by an RRA client 7 kind of expectation of privacy if he 7 against Mr. Epstein? 8 communicated with another person who he didn't In other words — Well, I don't know. Do 9 even work with and that it would privileged? 9 you have any such documents that concerns the 10 MR. KING: No. Our position is what I've 10 financing of those litigation matters? 11 set forth. 11 A The only information I really have about 12 MRS APRIL Okay. You don't have to 12 that is what I spoke about in my prior deposition in 13 repeat it. It speaks for itself I guess. 13 the Trustee case 14 BY MRS APRIL: 14 Q And you don't have any documents about 15 O Number 5. Between March 1, 2009 to the 15 that? 16 present date we had asked you this: For any and all 16 A I don't think I've ever seen any documents 17 documents between or on behalf of any agent of RRA, 17 about that. 18 including you, and any third party, meaning someone 18 O If you don't mind looking at Number 5 just 19 who doesn't work at RRA, regarding a purported 19 for a minute, because there are Subparts a, b, c, d 20 settlement of any litigation between Mr. Epstein and 20 and e. 21 one of your clients. 21 A Yes. 22 Did you look to see If you had any such 22 Q Just to be clear then. You don't think you 23 documents? 23 have any documents concerning - let's go to "b," I A Settlement" That's settlement with 24 think you've answered "a" already - soliciting or Epstein" 25 receiving money in return for settlement funds United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608552 17 (Pages 65 to 68) Page 65 Page 67 1 allegedly paid or to be paid by Epstein? 1 employment agreements or documents between Mr. 2 Not necessarily a document you created, but Edwards and RRA that describes compensation? 3 that came into your possession from Mr. Rothstein or 3 A Nope 4 anyone else? 4 Q So whether or not It's privileged, you 5 A Absolutely. Wet before 2010 I didn't 5 don't have it, if it exists? 6 know of any settlement or settlement funds or 6 A I don't have it, it it exists. 7 anything having to do with that issue involving the 7 O Sir, you said you've been a lawyer for 24 8 Epstein cases — 8 years. Where did you go to law school? 9 O All right Had you — 9 A Nova. 10 A -- except as specificatly described in 10 O And currently in your - Is It Russell S. 11 answers to questions in my prior deposition when the 11 Adler, P.A.? 12 questions were asked of me by Mr. Lichtman and I 12 A Yes. 13 answered them. Those questions and answers touch on 13 Q Do you have other lawyers who work with you 14 some of the issues you're asking me about today. 14 as employees or partners? 15 O In that deposition, do you recall 15 A I have no employees or partners 16 testifying that you did not know prior to the breakup 16 O Prior to RRA I think you have said the firm 17 of the firm that Scott Rothstein was marketing 17 that you were with was Kartan (pronouncing)? 18 structured settlements to investors? 18 A Karmin. 19 A I had no idea. I did not know at all 19 Q Karmin & - 20 Q Did you know or hear — Let me break it 20 A It was Karmin & Adler. P.A., I believe. 21 Into two questions. 21 Q Do you recall going through your prior 22 Did you know that Scott Rothstein was 22 employment when asked by Mr. Uchtman about what 23 marketing investments of any kind to anybody during 23 positions you had held as a lawyer before joining 24 the time that you worked at RRA? 24 RRA? 25 A I never knew anything about that when I 25 A I don't specifically recall, but if he Page 66 Page 68 1 worked at RRA. 1 asked me I would have told him. 2 O Did you hear even as rumor that he was 2 O So you graduated in 19 — What year Is 24 3 selling some kind of Investments? 3 years ago? 4 A While I worked at RRA? 4 A What, what year did I graduated from law 5 O Yes. 5 school? 6 A Absolutely not. 6 Q Yes. 7 O I assume your answer is going to be no, but 7 A 1986. 8 let me just ask you to look at Number 6 so that I'm 8 Q Can you just take me through your 9 clear on the e-mails that you're going to go back and 9 employment, a summary of what you did first? I know 10 look at don't cover this. 10 when you got to Karmin & Adler, but between law 11 Number 6, we asked you if you had any 11 school and that firm. 12 documents which purport to evidence any transfer of 12 A So you would like to know my employment 13 funds or property from Epstein to RRA, Mr. Rothstein 13 history from 1986 forward, is that your question, 14 or any other Rothstein-related entity for the 14 CI Yes. 15 settlement of any case against Epstein, real or IS A In 1986 I was employed by Sheldon J. 16 fabricated? 16 Schlessinger, P.A. 17 A Same answer. During the time I was at RRA, 17 Q Okay. 18 the Epstein cases were all pending. Nothing had been 18 A In early-1987 or in late-1986 I left his 19 settled. There were no monies or funds or transfers 19 employment and I went into solo practice for several 20 that I knew of. 20 years. And then I joined the law firm of Roderman, 21 Q That's why the word "purport" is in there. 21 Spadara & Karmin in 1988. I'm sorry. In 19881 22 A Whatever, but I'm just telling you. 22 joined that firm Roderman, Spadaro & Karmin. Two 23 O Number 7 I believe you've answered? 23 years later in 1990, Karmin and I split off and 24 A I have 24 formed Karmin & Adler. 25 O You do not have any copies of any 25 CI And that brings us up to when you — United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608553 18 (Pages 69 to 72) Page 69 Page 71 A Basically, right. Carl. you know, we 1 A There were two, I think there were two 2 brought some people on; some lawyers came, some 2 malpractice suits against me. I might have been 3 lawyers went. Cad went out on disability and I 3 deposed in one of them, but I'm not positive. And I 4 bought him out in, I think, 2003 or 2002, but we kept 4 think I've been deposed a few times as like an 5 the firm name and I stayed there until I joined RRA 5 attorney's fees expert. 6 in February of 2005. 6 0 That's what I was going to ask you, as an 7 0 I believe you testified already that you've 7 expert? settled the case that you gave testimony, I mean, the 8 A Yeah. And I think that's it. There's 9 adversary proceeding that the bankruptcy Trustee 9 something else that there might have been another 10 filed against you? 10 time I testified. I just don't remember the details 11 A Yes. 11 of that. 12 O And you're not a party in any other 12 O You mentioned earlier that when you — soon 13 lawsuits at present? 13 after you gave the deposition October 28th, 2010 that 14 A At present, no. 14 you did see the transcript and you looked at it? 15 O Have you ever been a party in a lawsuit 15 A I read it over. I might not have read it 16 other than that one? 16 word for word, but I looked through it. 17 A Yes. 17 O Well, typically, court reporters will give 18 O trillion? 18 you an Errata Sheet and ask the witness if they want 19 A In my whole life? 19 to make any corrections? 20 O Yes. 20 A I don't think I did. I might have said I 21 A I was named in two other lawsuits arising 21 will read, but I don't think I made any corrections 22 out of the RRA situation. 22 to the Errata Sheet. 23 0 Are those suits pending? 23 Q To your knowledge, were there any 24 A No. I settled one of them. The other I 24 inaccuracies in your statement? 25 believe I was dismissed from. 25 A Not to my knowledge. But again, I did not Page 7O Page 7: O And excluding — 1 read it word for word. In other words, I ended up 2 A And have had other litigation other than 2 effectively waiving my right to read and make 3 that. 3 corrections on the Errata Sheet by not returning 4 O Well, excluding like professional 4 h. 5 negligence or anything relating to RRA, have you been 5 O Other than your own counsel and your 6 a party in any other lawsuit? 6 conversation with Brad Edwards, did you speak to 7 A Just maybe by a credit card company or I 7 anyone else about the fact that you were being 8 think West Publishing sued me once. I didn't pay my B deposed in this case? 9 Westlaw bill. I think that's about it subject to 9 A I might have told my wife I'm not sure. 10 those parameters and subject to everything else I 10 O I understand. And again, I'm doing this to 11 disclosed to you. 11 save time. We can go through it more slowly, but 12 Q What about a plaintiff, have you ever been 12 based on your prior testimony in answers to questions 13 a plaintiff in a lawsuit? 13 by Mr. Lichtman, you were never actually an owner of 14 A I think I sued someone in small claims 14 any equity in RRA, is that correct? You were 15 court in college that I think ran into my car, but I 15 promised to be, but you never actually received any 16 think that's it. 16 stock, correct? 17 O Have you been deposed before last year when 17 A Correct. 18 you gave a deposition in the adversary proceeding 18 O And that you had a title of vice-president, 19 that Chuck Lichtman took your deposition? 19 but that was more of a title rather than a meaningful 20 A Have I ever been deposed in my life before 20 functional title? 21 then? 21 A It was just that, d was a title. I never 22 O Well, since you were a lawyer? 22 acted as vice-president in any capacity. It was a 23 A Yes. 23 title I was given. 24 O Were you deposed as a — were any of them 24 O Did you have the authority to hire or fire 25 concerning your legal practice? 25 at all? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608554 19 (Pages 73 to 76) Page 73 Page 1 A Nope 1 about the case, the $24 million case? 2 Q Even your secretary or some clerical 2 A That Christina Kitterman had brought in. 3 person? 3 Q Yes. 4 A If I wanted to get rid of a secretary. I 4 A And Brad called me once he saw that 5 could go to Debra and tell her, Please get rid of 5 Q So the connection there is strictly because 6 them. And she would. So I guess I had the indirect 6 Christina brought in the case, you worked on the 7 authority to do that. 7 case, the case got publicity, Brad called you about 8 Q You were head of your Tort Group. Was the 8 it; that's the only connection between Christina 9 firm divided into other departments similar? 9 Kittennan and Brad Edwards? 10 A Whether there other practice areas within :0 A Christina Krtterman had nothing at all to 11 the firm. yes. 11 do with it other than the fact that she brought that 12 Q Do you know how many there were? 12 Doe vs. Siriwat case into our law firm. :3 A Probably five or six. 13 Q Was Stuart Rosenfeldt part of your practice :4 Ct Was there any discussion between you and 14 area group? :5 other lawyers at the firm, including Scott Rothstein, 15 A No. :6 about, well, vetting Mr. Edwards before he joined the 16 CI Was he the head of a different group? :7 firm where you sat around the table and talked about :7 A Yes. 18 whether it would be a good idea to bring him on or 18 0 What was that group called? 19 you didn't sit around the table but you talked? 19 A Labor and Employment. 20 A Other than telling Scott Rothstein that I 20 Cl Did Brad Edwards bring over to your 21 had met with Brad and I wanted to bring him into the 21 knowledge any Labor and Employment cases? 22 firm, no. 22 A I don't know. 23 Q What about references or background checks 23 CI If he did, he was In your group? He wasn't 24 on Mr. Edwards, did you personally or did you ask 24 like Could a person be in more than one group 25 someone else to do that? 25 depending on the kinds of cases they had? Page 74 Page 76 1 A I didn't perform any. Whether the firm did 1 A I think that some groups were more 2 or not. I really don't know. 2 well-defined than others within that firm and some 3 Q Do you know whether the firm typically 3 groups were run differently than others horn an 4 would do any kind of checks on lawyers before 4 administrative viewpoint. I think some groups 5 bringing them on? S weren't even run at all, they were just lawyers who 6 A What specifically do you mean by checks on 6 practiced in the same area and who lust worked 7 lawyers" 7 together. 8 Q Calling the Florida Bar to make sin 8 O But when Brad joined the firm I Mink you 9 they're in good standing, checking to see that they 9 mentioned earlier that there was what I call an 10 really went to law school, whether they have any 10 Inventory or a case list of what he brought over. 11 convictions, things like that? 11 Did you personally look at the cases so you would 12 A I don't know one way or the other. 12 have an understanding of the nature of the book of 13 Q You didn't do it and you don't know? 13 business he brought over? 14 A I did not do It for the most part. no. I 14 Let me rephrase that. I don't moan 15 only hired lawyers that I knew. 15 personally looked at the case files. 16 Q In your testimony that you gave on October 16 A Right. 17 28, 2010 you attribute, indirectly I think, Mr. 17 O But look at the style of the case and have 18 Edwards coming to the firm with Christina Kitterman 18 some conversation so you know what they were about? 19 bringing in the case that was your 524 million 19 A Once they got on our case list. I might 20 verdict. Do you remember that? 20 have sat with him and said, What's this case? What's 21 MR. KING Objection to form. 21 Mat about? What's this case? What's that about? 22 BY MRS APRIL 22 O Were you aware whether any of them were 23 O Let me ask you this, because it's not meant 23 sexual harassment cases against an employer? 24 to impeach you, it's just to get to a point You 24 A Are you asking whether I am aware that any 25 mentioned earlier that Brad Edwards saw some press 25 of them were Labor & Employment cases? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608555 20 (Pages 77 to 80) Page Page 79 1 Q Well, no. Somebody might call it that. success rate, you know, his wins or losses or how he 2 Specifically, harassment cases by an employee against had done in cases? 3 an employer? 3 A We may have. but I do not specifically 4 A I really would not know about that. Not to 4 recall. 5 say I wouldn't have access to that, but I was 5 O Who besides Scott Rothstein In the firm - I 6 concerned wth the tort cases that I was 6 know now I think It's the Trustee, but at the time 7 administratively overseeing 7 the firm was still operating, besides Scott 8 O Are you saying that if ho did have a case 8 Rothstein - who else would have known the 9 or cases of that type that, administratively, they 9 compensation package that was ultimately agreed upon 10 would be overseen by Stuart Rosenfoldt or someone 10 with Brad Edwards? 11 else? 11 A I don't know for sure, but probably whoever 12 A If Brad, hypothetically, brought a Labor & 12 was involved in payroll and benefits and things like 13 Employment case into the firm, he would deal with 13 that. I don't really know who had access to what on 14 Stuart Rosenfeld( about that. If he told me he had 14 that administrative side of the firm. 15 one, I would say, Go and talk to Stuart. Lawyers 15 Q But some administrative person, you Just 16 were encouraged to bring in other kinds of cases that 16 don't know who, or persons? 17 other lawyers in the firm handled, but I didn't 17 A I am not even sure under oath, you know. 18 really keep track of what cases Brad brought Into the 18 Probably Irene Stay (phonetic). who was the 19 firm that were not regarding personal injury a 19 bookkeeper, probably had salary information I would 20 tort. 20 Imagine, but there were several different people over 21 Q When Brad came into the firm — Well, let 21 time who worked in that administrative pan of the 22 me back up. 22 office with Scott and Debra and as of those people. 23 At Rothstein, Rosentoidt & Adler, wore 23 They handled that. 24 lawyers referred to as partners or shareholders and 24 O Did you ever participate in any assessment, 25 associates? 25 review of the work of attorneys who worked with you. Page 78 Page .9 .3 A People were given titles like that. 1 with Mr. Rothstein? In other words, where you 2 O And when Brad came In was he considered In 2 discussed with him how they were doing for purposes 3 the associate group or In the partnerfshareholder, If 3 of their year-end compensation or whether they would 4 you know? 4 have adjustments? Did you have any of those sort of 5 MR. KING: Objection. Form. 5 discussions with him? 6 A He would have been either an associate or a 6 A The only kind of discussions I recall, he 7 partner. I don't recall what type of title he was 7 might have said. How is this person doing? Or, How 8 given when he came in. I don't recall 8 is that person doing? At one point I might have been 9 O Is that something that he talked to you 9 named to a Compensation Committee, but I don't think 10 about when you met with him about whether or not it 10 that any Compensation Committee that I was ever 11 was Important what his title was? 11 involved in ever even met. It was like something 12 A I don't recall 12 that was said or discussed that Scott brought up, but 13 CI Do you know how in the firm It was 13 I never sat down and made compensation decisions or 14 determined whether somebody was given the associate 14 reviewed the work for compensation purposes. 15 title versus partner or shareholder? 15 I oversaw the case list and the 16 A I did not know the specific criteria. but 16 distribution of cases among different attomeys and 17 that was ultimately up to Scott Rothstein. 17 staff members to make sure the cases were balanced. 18 O Wore there any attorneys at the firm who 18 0 Did you even, well, even fill out a written 19 were in a different category such as of counsel or 19 evaluation of the lawyers that worked with you? 20 senior counsel or some other title? 20 A No. Not a formal written evaluation. 21 A Was anyone of counsel? I'm not sure. I 21 0 What about an Informal written evaluation 22 just don't know. 22 or an e-mail even? 23 O When you met with Brad Edwards at Yolo 23 A Did I ever send an e-mail to one of the 24 during your meeting when you talked to him about his 24 lawyers in my group about something on one of their 25 possibly Joining RRA, did he describe to you hi 25 cases? I'm sure I did. United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608556 21 (Pages 81 to 84) Page 81 Page 83 1 Q No. No. I mean, to Mr. Rothstein or the 1 O So Is It accurate to say that until Brad 2 Compensation Committee? You said they never met, but 2 Edwards called you about what I'm calling the $24 3 was there ever any collection of information when you 3 million verdict because it's easier than remembering 4 wore there about how the eight other lawyers in your 4 the name who went bankrupt, for me it Is, until he S group stacked up, how they wore doing? S called you and said ho had soon something in the 6 A There may have been some e-mails like that. 6 newspaper, did you even know the kinds of eases that 7 I don't specifically recall. 7 he was working on when you would see him at the gym? 8 Q Do you remember it there worn any ever done A I knew he was handling personal injury 9 on Brad Edwards? 9 cases, but that's about all that I knew. 10 A I don't recall. He wasn't there for that 10 Q Did you know at that erns he had any abuse 11 long, you know. 11 cases? 12 Q Yes. 12 A Al what time? 13 A He was probably there about a year, give or 13 O When you were seeing him at the gym, before 14 take. That's yaw I was kind of fuzzy about whether 14 he called you — 15 he started in '08 or '09. 15 A Before he called me that day to 16 O You said you didn't read his deposition 16 congratulate me about my verdict, I did not know 17 given In this case? 17 anything about any sexual abuse cases that he had or 18 A No, never 047 18 that he was handling. 19 O Do you know where ho went to work attar RRA 19 MR. HADDAD: You guys go ahead. 20 closed? 20 MRS. APRIL: No. Why don't we take a 21 A Yes 21 couple minute break. is that okay? 22 O Where? 22 (WHEREUPON, a short break look place from 23 A Tne Farmer. Jaffe firm 23 11:10 a.m. to 11:20 a.m.) 29 Q DM you consider going to that firm? 24 BY MRS. APRIL: 25 A Yes. 25 O Did you ever go to Brad Edwards' office Page 82 Page 84 1 0 Why didn't you go there? 1 before he joined your firm? 2 A Because soon after they began discussing 2 A No. I might have been to the Kubicki, 3 forming that firm, more details about the extent of 3 Draper firm while he was a member there, but I never 4 Rothstein's criminal acts were corning out. I'm 4 went into his office at that firm. 5 trying to think of a way to word this. I began to be 5 Q At Kublekl, Draper, this was one case you 6 concerned that just because my name was part of the 6 had where he was on the other side, he was on the 7 firm name that there could be some negative 7 defense team? 8 association by outsiders with my name and I did not 8 A I had many cases over the years with 9 want anything involving my name to affect or hurt the 9 Earteen Cote and with Ken Oliver and other lawyers at 10 lawyers who were forming that firm. Arid so, I chose 10 the Kubicki, Draper firm. When Brad Edwards was 11 at that point in time to go into solo practice where 11 there, he worked as an associate to Eadeen Cote. I 12 I still am today. 12 only recall I think one case where Brad showed up 13 Q Now, Brad Edwards, he has testified in his 13 covering a depo or doing something for Earieen. 14 deposition or you have testified today that you knew 14 0 Were you ever In a case that went to trial 15 him also at The Fitness Factory, the gym? 15 that he was at the trial? 16 A The Fitness Company 16 A No. I never tried a case against him. 17 CI The Fitness Company. Okay. And did you 17 0 Did you ever see him in court before he 18 ever talk about cases at the gym? 18 Joined the firm? 19 A In smalttalk I might have said something 19 A I might have seen him in the courthouse at 20 like, I'm starting trial tomorrow, or, I just hit a 20 motion calendar. But did I ever see him in trial 21 verdict. Just things like that. Things that lawyers 21 before he joined the firm -- 22 talk about in passing when they see each other. 22 0 Well, I mean, a trial or a substantive 23 0 What about Brad to you, did he give you 23 evidentiary hearing or something like that? 24 similar sort of smailtalk? 24 A No. 25 A Not that I really recall. 25 Q Did you have any information about his United Reporting, Inc,. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608557 22 (Pages 85 to 88) Page 85 Page 87 1 skills as a trial lawyer? 1 Q Do you know if they were significant 2 A I just knew that he had been a prosecutor 2 settlements, you know, upwards of six figures, seven 3 before he joined Kubicki, Draper and I knew that he 3 figures? 4 had been a defense attorney; I felt that defense 4 A I have no recollection. I just don't know. 5 attorneys make good plaintiff lawyers when they 5 I don't think -- There were no seven-figure 6 switch sides. 6 settlements. There might have been six fgures. Are 7 Q To your knowledge, did Brad Edwards use an 7 you talking about the fee or the gross settlement 8 attorney to represent him in his negotiations with 8 amount? 9 Scott Rothstein? 9 O Fee. 10 A I don't think so. 10 A I don't think there were any six• or 11 Q I'm not clear if your prior answer covers 11 seven•fgure settlements diming the short lime he 12 this, so let me just ask you: Was it typical at RRA 12 worked there on his cases, but I might be wrong. 13 for lawyers who produced a lot of revenue for the 13 Q Are you aware of the fact that RRA financed 14 firm to get bonuses for that or do you know? 14 costs for the cases against Jeffrey Epstein during 15 A Everybody had their own compensation 15 the time Brad Edwards was at the firm? 16 package. So the reason I cannot answer your question 16 A I'm aware that the firm advanced costs or, 17 is that I really wasn't familiar with the 17 I should say, paid costs on those cases — on cases 18 compensation packages or even the bonus structure 18 that were being handled by the Tort Group, that would 19 that other lawyers had other than my own. 19 include Brad Edwards cases in the most general sense. 20 Q Do you know during the time that Brad 20 Can I tea you if I know for sure, can I 21 Edwards was with the firm what kind of collections, 21 swear under oath that the firm advanced costs on the 22 If any, came Into the firm as a result of his effort 22 Epstein cases? I can't tell you that. If I wanted 23 on his cases or other cases he worked on? 23 to know how much money RRA advanced or had put into 29 A You call them collections. I call them 24 any case, I would have to get that through the 25 settlements or verdicts that were paid. I don't 25 Bookkeeping Department because they kept those Page 86 Page 88 1 think he tried any cases, actual trials while he was records, not me. That would typically occur before 2 at RRA for the time that he was there. 2 mediation when I had to know what the cost would be 3 Did he settle cases when he was there? 3 or when a case settled so that we could prepare the 4 Probably, but I can't recall a specific case as I sit Settlement Statement. 5 here right now. 5 Q Do you know whether RRA loaned any money to 6 Q Is it accurate to say you don't know what 6 Brad Edwards when he was a lawyer at the firm? 7 money came in as a result of his efforts through 7 A I do not know. 8 settlement, for example? 8 O Do you know what individuals worked with 9 A I would have kept track of that when we 9 Brad Edwards on his cases? 10 were at the firm, but I don't know as I sit here 10 A Which cases are you referring to? 11 today. 11 • Well, lot's start with the Epstein cases. 12 0 That information, to your knowledge, would 12 Was there any particular lawyers or paralegals that 13 be in the hands of the Trustee? 13 were assigned to him on those cases? 19 A Yes 14 A At one point in time he did have a 15 O Do you recall learning of any settlement of 15 secretary named Jackie, I don't know her last name. 16 a Brad Edwards case? And I'm not talking now about 16 He might have had — There was a period of time that 17 necessarily Mr. Epstein, but any case that Brad 17 he did not have his own secretary, so I dent — I 18 Edwards brought in that was a significant settlement. 18 cannot tell you as we sit here today which secretary 19 A First of all, to the best of my 19 or secretaries other than Jackie worked on his 20 recollection, none of the Epstein Cases settled while 20 files. 21 he was at the firm I think I told you. 21. Q Could it have been Jackie Johnson? 22 Q I think you said that, yes. 22 A I believe so. 23 A I think he may have settled one or two 23 O What about attorneys, wore there particular 29 others cases not involving Epstein while he was at 24 attorneys? Did he have associate attorneys that 25 RRA during the short time he was there. 25 worked on his cases, more junior lawyers? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608558 23 (Pages 89 to 92) Page 89 Page 91 1 A He was kind of the junior guy in your group 1 if you remitter that. 2 or one of them. He was like a junior guy. Brad. The 2 MRS. APRIL: Off the record 3 only lawyer that I recall who actually did work on 3 (WHEREUPON. an off-the-record discussion 4 Ns case at least to some extent was Bill Berger. 4 was had). S As I said. I never really did any 5 BY MRS. APRIL: 6 particular work on Brad's cases other than perhaps 6 O Did Robert Buechel ever, to your knowledge, 7 discussing things with him from lime to time or him 7 work on Epstein cases? 8 bouncing something off of me and my attending those 8 A He may have worked on some issues in 9 two depositions where I did not ask any questions. 9 Epstein cases, but I don't know. Every now and then 10 O Do you recall volunteering to attend a 10 he jumped in and helped us out on issues or 11 deposition in an Epstein case or cases of attorney 11 particular cases, but I really don't know if he hac 12 Man Dershowitz? 12 anything to do with the Epstein cases. 13 A I was interested in the fact that 13 O What about Judge Stone, Retired Judge Barry 14 Dershowitz was involved in the case because It's Alan 14 Stone? You know him, right? 15 Dershowitz. I might have said, 'I'd like to go to 15 A Yes 16 that depo." I might have said that, but I don't 16 O He was at the firm. Do you know if he did 17 think the dope ever went off that I can recall. It 17 any work on the Epstein cases? 18 might have, but I wasn't there 18 A I have no idea. And if he did. it was not 19 O When you say you might have said you were 19 at my request. But again, he was available to 20 Interested because of the deponent more than anything 20 research issues and stuff like that, and sometimes he 21 else 21 would be looking for, you know, some work to do 22 A The case had, the Epstein cases had some 22 but — 23 Interesting names in them like Dershowitz. So that 23 O What about Mark Nurik, do you know Mark 24 would have been a depo that. if I was available, I 24 Nurik? 25 would like to go and be a fly on the wall and sit 25 A Yes. Page 90 Page 9. 1 there. 1 O Do you know if he did any work in arty 2 O Would that be true of any other, shall we 2 capacity on Epstein cases? 3 say, high-profile witnesses, were any of them of 3 A He may have, but I don't know specifically. 4 Interest to you? 4 I don't recall anything specific. 5 A I don't recall anyone other than Epstein 5 O Cad Under, do you know him? 6 himself being high profile. 6 A Yes. 7 O What about Donald Trump, he's on television 7 () Do you know if Carl Linder ever either did 8 every day lately? I know he's pretty high profile. 8 work or gave any advice - I'm trying to word this in 9 A I know who Donald Trump is, what about him? 9 a way where we don't run Into that work-product 10 O Do you recall saying you would do a Trump 10 thing. Well, did any work? II deposition If it occurred? 11 A Same answer. 12 A I don't recall saying that. I mean. I 12 O What kind of work did Carl Under do at the 13 might have. I don't even recall Donald Trump's name 13 firm, ff you know? 14 being associated with the Epstein cases. But then 14 A He did asset protection work and -- 15 again, that was several years ago. 15 Basically, asset protection work. Oh, and he did 16 O Well, actually, those depositions were 16 some estate planning as well. 17 being set in the Fall of 2009, so not so long ago. 17 O Steve Jaffe you mentioned, or maybe you 8 A A lot has happened since then. If you have 18 didn't mention, was he one of your Tort Group folks? 19 something from me saying that I'd like to go to 19 A Yes. 20 Donald Trump's deposition, then you can show it to me 20 O Do you know if he worked on Epstein cases 21 and I will tell you whether I recall if — 21 stall? 22 O Actually, I can't. In this case there is 22 A Same answer 23 an order that I don't fully understand that does not 23 O Did Steve — 24 permit me to show certain documents. So I'm going to 24 A Same answer I do not have a specific 25 respect that order for now, but I'm just asking you 25 recollection of him working on any particular issue. United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608559 24 (Pages 93 to 9 6) Page 93 Page 95 1 He may have. but I don't know. 1 A There were some lateral filing cabinets. 2 O Do you recall ever assembling a meeting in 2 Particularly, some lawyers had lateral filing 3 the west conference room with the several individuals 3 cabinets. but most did not because the firm was 4 I've Just mentioned or any of them, if not all of 4 paperless. So the files were kept off-site, cabinets 5 them, to discuss the Epstein cases soon after, well, 5 were kept off-site, for the most part 6 In April of 2009? 6 0 Did you ever go Into Brad Edwards' office 7 A I may have. I remember. I vaguely remember 7 at RRA? 8 sometimes we would have meetings like that on cases 8 A Sure. 9 for various reasons. So, I may have. 9 Q Did you ever see any lateral filing 10 Q And was your purpose in that kind of 10 cabinets In there? 11 meeting to make sure staffing and schedules were 11 A Don't think so. He might have had a single 12 working out as opposed to substance? 12 or something, but I don't think so. 13 A First of all. I told you, I don't remember 13 Q Did you ever see sometimes lawyers have 14 specifically whether we met on that case or not. And 14 boxes of documents in their office, did you ever see 15 even if we did and even if it had to do with the 15 any In his office? 16 Epstein case, that would certainty be work-product 16 A I don't have a specific recollection of 17 privilege and I would assert that privilege. 17 that one way or the other. I did not go — I never 18 Q No. That's why I asked you a more generic 18 went in there to look at boxes, to look through 19 question. Typically — 19 boxes, to count boxes or to see what boxes they were. 20 A I can't answer a question lice that, 20 I never paid any particular attention to that, so I 21 typically, because there was no typically. There 21 can't answer your question. 22 were no regularly-scheduled meetings in any 22 CI Do you recall whether his office was neat 23 particular case. We would have meetings on cases 23 or messy? 24 from time to time for various reasons. 24 A I don't have a specific recollection on 25 Q Earlier I had asked you questions about a 25 that one way or the other. I'm sorry. Page 94 Page 96 1 meeting in Scott Rothstein's office that was Q Is it accurate, I'm trying to get this 2 referenced in your deposition of last October, and I 2 right, to say that at RRA there was not on-site a 3 think it's established that there was at least some 3 central file room where a lawyer would request files 4 boxes of documents having to do with the Epstein 4 and someone would pull them and bring them to him? 5 case. Do we agree on that, at least one? 5 A That is correct. There were some filing 6 A Apparently, that's what I testified to in 6 cabinets, there were some banks of Filing cabinets 7 the Trustee case. 7 that particular lawyers insisted on using or having 8 Q Do you know where those files were kept 8 for their own purposes, but not -- 9 when they weren't in Scott Rothstein's office? In 9 THE WITNESS- Can we go off the record. 10 other words, where files of Bradley Edwards' were 10 please? 11 kept relative to -- Well, did you have a storage 11 MRS. APRIL: Yes. 12 room? Did he keep them in his office, do you know? 12 (WHEREUPON, an off-the-record discussion was 13 A They might have been kept in his office or 13 had). 14 they might have been kept somewhere else by him. 14 BY MRS. APRIL: 15 They were his files, he brought them there and he 15 Q Do you know a person named Cara Holmes? 16 worked on them. I don't know where he kept them 16 A Cara Holmes? 17 specifically. 17 O Yes. 18 Q in your firm — Since I never was actually 18 A Yes. 19 in your firm, that firm, did you have file areas 19 O Was she part of your tort group at RRA? 20 outside of the lawyers' offices where the secretaries 20 A No. 21 sat or where the office — Let me ask you that: Is 21 Q Do you know if she was a lawyer there? 22 that how some files were kept? 22 A She was. 23 A You're asking if we had lateral filing 23 Q Do you know what group she was in or 24 cabinets? 24 associated with? 25 0 Yes. 25 A I think she was with the Alcohol Beverages United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608560 25 (Pages 97 to 100) Page 97 Page 99 1 people that came over. We brought over a couple of 1 Q So maybe somebody left? 2 those people and she was one of them 2 A Yeah. 3 Q She came over with some other lawyers you 3 40 Bill Berger wasn't in your group? 4 think? 4 A No. 5 A I think so. yeah. 5 Q Was he in a group or was he a kind of 6 Q Do you know who headed up that group or who 6 cross-lines Idnd of guy? 7 was in that group besides her? 7 A He was in the Boca office. He was more or 8 A I don't even know if they were a formal less a litigation attorney. 9 group, per se, if they had a name. 9 Q Did you know or do you know a lawyer or 10 O Do you know the names of any lawyers who 10 professor named Paul Cassell? 11 did that kind of work there besides Cara Holmes? 11 A Paul Cassell? 12 A Alcohol stuff? 12 Q Yes. 13 O Yeah. 13 A How do you spell that', 14 A Mike Wheeler was the other one. 14 Q Well, I think it's Ca-s-s-e4-1 15 Q Do you know if Cara Holmes was at the firm 15 A Does not ring a bell. 16 before Brad Edwards? 16 Q Does it ring a bell if I tell you that he 17 A I'm not positive. I think Brad was there 17 is a professor at the University of Utah? 18 before she was. but I'm not sure. 18 A That doesn't ring a bell either I'm 19 CI Do you know If she was a fairly junior 19 sorry. 20 lawyer when she came to the firm? 20 Q Do you know anybody named Howell who 21 A Cara? 21 referred any cases to Brad Epstein (sic)? 22 O Yeah. 22 A Doesn't ring a bell either. 23 A I don't know when she got her law degree. 23 q Did you, other than Alan Dershowitz - and I 24 I couldn't tell you that. 24 think you testified you did not end up attending his 25 O Did you ever work with her or did she ever 25 deposition, maybe it didn't occur at all - did you Page 98 Page -3J 1 work on your cases? 1 agree to attend any depositions in any Epstein case 2 A Did she ever work on my cases? I don't 2 other than the two that you've given? 3 think she did, unless she worked with one of the 3 A I may have offered to, especially now that 4 lawyers in my group on one of the cases in my 4 you brought up the Dershowitz. I may have offered 5 division, but I wouldn't necessarily know that. 5 to, but I don't have a specific recollection of which 6 Cl Let me make sure — Can you give me your 6 ones I would have offered to, if that helps. 7 group again in 2009? 7 Q And if you would have attended Dershowitz's A First, just to expand on that, if Brad had 8 deposition, it was a deposition that was 9 Cara Holmes working on one of his cases or looking 9 being noticed by your firm, right? 10 into en issue on it, I would not necessarily know 10 A I don't, I really don't recall. 11 that. Lawyers are free to interact and collaborate 11 Q But you offered to take it Or juSt tO 12 with each other. it didn't have to go through me. 12 attend It? 13 Q Okay. 13 A I didn't even remember that at all before 14 A You want to know the names of the lawyers 14 you started reading from something that kind of 15 in my tort group as of October 2009? 15 brought back some memory of that. I don't recall the 16 Q Yes, please. Well, 2009. ri d It change a 16 level of detail that you're asking me for. I'm 1'7 lot during 2009? 17 cony. 18 A During 2009. I don't think so. 18 Q Did you ever volunteer to attend a 19 O Well, tell me who you could remember that 19 deposition of Prince Andrew of the British Royal 20 was there in 2009? 20 family if it may have occurred? 21 A Me, Gary Farmer, Steven Jaffe, Mike 21 A I may have. but who knows. 22 Weissing, Tami Wolfe. Brad Edwards, Mark Fistos, Seth 22 Q Why not? I wonder what kind of privileges 23 Lehrman. That's eight. Did I name Brad in that? 23 they have? 24 Q You did. 24 A I have family in England. So anything at 25 A Okay. 25 all that involves going to England I would volunteer United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608561 26 (Pages 101 to 104) Page 101 Page 103 1 for, but I really don't recall whether or not I ever 1 valuation of a case. the question contains a 2 volunteered to take that depo. I may have. 2 pre-supposition or content about what the discussion 3 Q In 2009, did you maintain another residence 3 was about and that's what makes it privileged in my 4 in New York City? 4 mind. 5 A I had an apartment there. 5 Q Although strategy is such a broad thing 6 Q So did you — 6 that — 7 A In 2010 did you say? 7 A Fine. Look, did I have discussions about 8 Q '9. 8 the Epstein case with Brad Edwards? I'm sure I did. A In 2009, yes. 9 What were those particular discussions about. to the 10 Q During that time did you recall 10 extent that I had them? That's work-product, as I 11 volunteering to cover other New York depositions in 11 understand the work-product doctrine. 12 any case? 12 0 Did you actually approve any costs that 13 A I may have. Again, I don't specifically 13 were expended in connection with the Epstein case, 14 recall, but I may have. I was always volunteering to 14 costs that the firm was going to wind up paying for 15 help out my lawyers on cases when I was needed and 15 until the case ended at least? 16 this case was no exception, but what I volunteered 16 A Not as a matter of procedure. If a lawyer 17 for and what I ended up doing on this case are two 17 asked me about: Can I spend money on this? Can I 18 different things. 18 spend money on that? I might tell them yes or no or 19 Q Did you ever participate in any valuation 19 I might tell them, if its a large expense, to go to 20 of the settlement value of any Epstein case? 20 Rothstein and ask him. 21 A First of all, if I did, I believe that 21 But it was really mom of a situational 22 would be work-product. 22 thing. There was no procedural rule in place where I 23 Q That's why it's a yes or no. 23 would approve or disapprove costs. And I knew, 24 A And I would assert that privilege. Well, 24 generally, what costs we could spend money on without 25 it's not a yes or no, because by inserting into it 25 having to get any kind of special approval. Page 102 Page 104 1 the subject matter of any conversation you are 0 What about investigators? Did the firm 2 artfully attempting to poke around the work-product 2 have investigators who were employed by the firm? 3 privilege, and I would assert the privilege and 3 A Yes. 4 refuse to answer that question. 4 CI And was Ken Jenne one of those 5 The answer is: I may have or I may not 5 Investigators? 6 have. I don't have a specific recollection. But if 6 A He had to do with the Investigation Unit. 7 I did. then it's work-product. 7 Was he an actual investigator himself? He may have 8 Q Let me try and understand the parameters of 8 been 9 this privilege you're raising. Are you saying that 9 Q Was the cost of investigators assigned to 10 if I ask you this question, this hypothetical 10 any case considered a cost? In other words, was that 11 question: Did you play any role in developing a 11 charged to the file just like a court reporter or 12 strategy on Epstein cases? Are you claiming that 12 some other - 13 question invades the privilege? 13 A I don't know the answer to that question. 14 A Discussing strategy on a particular case? 14 Q So the firm had an Investigative Unit, is 5 Q Yes. Not what the strategy was, but if I 15 that what you called It? 16 said to you: Were you Involved, were you in the room :6 A At some point it did. It didn't always 17 with people talking about the case? Do you believe 17 have that, though. 78 that question calls for a privileged answer, 18 Q In 2009 did It have — 19 because - 19 A In 20091 think Ken Jenne was there and 20 A Hypothetically, a discussion about a 20 there was some other people who were working there, 21 particular case, the fact that a discussion took 21 too. 22 place may not be work-product, but what was discussed 22 Q What about Mike Fisten, do you know if he 23 in that discussion is work-product. 23 was there? 24 So when you say Did you have a strategy 24 A Yes. Now, again, I don't know if they were 25 discussion or did you have a discussion about a 25 directly employed by the RRA law firm or not and I United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608562 27 (Pages 105 to 108) Page 105 Page 107 1 don't even know if that matters to you. That's not 1 0 Do you know if Jeffrey Epstein was at any 2 the kind of detail that I would have information 2 time under surveillance with respect to persons sent 3 about. 3 by your firm? 4 Q So If there was a company that was formed, A I have no rica S say, Blue Line Investigations, did you ever hear of 5 O Did you ever meet with any of the 6 that? 6 plaintiffs in the cases that Mr. Edwards brought over A Eve heard of it. 7 that were against Jeffrey Epstein? 8 Q Do you know if that was a company formed by 8 A I said 'hello' to one of them in the lobby 9 Scott Rothstein or others at his direction? 9 one time. I don't remember her name. I remember she 10 A I don't know who formed it 10 was one of Brad's clients. But that was it. 'Hi, how 11 Q But did Ken Jenne and Mike Fisten have 11 are you? Nice to meet you: 12 offices at the firm? 12 O What about with their family members or 13 A There was an office that Ken Jenne had at 13 parents? 14 some point I don't know if Fisten had his own 14 A Never met them 15 office. :5 O Did you over toll anyone outside of the 16 Q Do you know if any other Investigators who 16 firm — Well, let me rephrase that. 17 were at the firm In 2009 or at some company as far 17 Did you over tell anyone outside of the 18 as — 18 gm or within the firm in a non-privileged 19 A I think Pat was one of them as 19 situation, meaning not speaking to a client, that 20 well. 20 your firm was In the process of suing Jeffrey Epstein 21 MADAME COURT REPORTER: Can we take a 21 and would disclose embarrassing information about Mr. 22 break? 22 Epstein or his friends, family, colleagues to drive 23 MRS. APRIL: Sure. 23 up the settlement value? 24 (WHEREUPON. a short break took place): 24 MR. KING: Objection. Foundation. 25 BY MRS. APRIL: 25 Predicate. Page 106 Page 10: 1 0 All right. I was asking you about 1 A Not to my recollection. 2 investigators. 2 O Did Brad Edwards ever say anything like 3 A Yes that in your presence? 4 Q Do you know if any of the firm A Not to my recollection al as. And even if 5 investigators were assigned to work on the Epstein 5 he did. it would be work-product but -- 6 case? 6 O Do you know what the cause of action is 7 A I don't know if anyone was assigned to 7 that is brought by Jeffrey Epstein in the case that 8 it. 8 we're here on today? 9 0 Do you know if they performed any services 9 A I think I was told in the beginning some 10 with respect to the case? 10 kind of RICO claim or something like that. I don't 11 A I think so in the general sense, but I 11 have a specific recollection of it. but I think it 12 don't really recall any details about that. 12 was some kind of civil RICO or -- 13 0 Do you know, dld you ever hear of the terrn 13 O Had you ever heard that there was an abuse 14 "dumpster diving"? 14 of process count? 15 A I have heard of that term. 15 A No, because I had never got into a 16 0 Do you know what it means? 16 discussion about what all the counts were with 17 A Yes. 17 anybody. 18 0 What does it mean? 18 O Have you ever worked on a case that was an 19 A When people go through other people's 19 abuse of process case? 20 garbage 20 A I don't think so. I have handled false 21 Q Do you know if any investigators, either 21 imprisonment cases from time to time and sometimes we 22 the ones that were named or otherwise, went through 22 use abuse of process as a related tort. So maybe In 23 Jeffrey Epstein's trash? 23 one or two of those cases, but for the most part. 24 MR. KING. Objection Work-product. 24 no. 25 A I have no idea. 25 MRS. APRIL: I think maybe now would be a United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608563 28 (Pages 109 to 112) Page 109 Page 111 1 good time to break, if ifs all right with you. 1 A The only one I can think of that had a 2 Let's go for an hour. 2 background in law enforcement was Eugene Gibbons, mho 3 THE WITNESS: Okay. What time do you want 3 was a Coral Gables police officer. There were a lot 4 to come back? 4 of people there and those are the only two that come 5 MR. HADDAD: I'm not coming back. You 5 to rrSd in law enforcement right now, other than Ken 6 don't need me here. 6 Jenne, of course. And Fislen was a former law 7 MRS. APRIL: Les go for an hour. I will 7 enforcement. 8 Still finish before you have to be out of here. 8 O Was Mr. Gibbons an - He was not In your 9 THE WITNESS: So we'll come back at one and 9 group, but he was an attorney? you'll try to finish by four? 10 A No. he was a Labor and Employment lawyer. 11 MRS. APRIL: Yes. 11 Q Flston you said was a former police 12 (WHEREUPON, a lunch break took place from 12 officer? 13 12:00 p.m. to 1:10 p.m., after which the 13 A I believe so. 14 following resumed outside the presence of Fred 14 O And we know Ken Jenne was a former Sheriff? 15 Haddad, Esquire). 15 A Yes. 16 BY MRS. APRIL: 16 Q Do you know where Ken Jenne works now or if 17 O I had asked you a few questions before the 17 he does? 18 lunch break about an attorney named Cara Holmes? 18 A I have no idea 19 A Yes. 19 O Have you ever spoken to him about Epstein 20 O And I noticed that I skipped a couple of 20 cases since the RRA firm ended? 21 points I wanted to ask about. 21 A I don't think I've seen him. Oh. I saw 22 A Sure. 22 him. The answer Is: No. I have not spoken to Ken 23 Q Do you know what her background was? 23 Jenne about the Epstein cases since the firm ended. 24 A She worked for the State. 24 Q But you think you have seen him around or 25 Q Do you know what she did for the State? 25 something? Page 110 Page 112 1 A I think she was with the Alcohol Board, 1 A I think he pulled up in his car in front of 2 AST 2 the building where he was in a car. He said hello to 3 O How do you know that? 3 me and I said. How are you doing? That was it. I 4 A That's just my recollection. 4 think that's the only time rve seen him since the 5 O Did you ever have occasion to have a 5 firm broke up. 6 conversation with her? 6 O I asked you before the break I believe 7 A Briefly. I might have had -- Other than, 7 about a — 8 1-ii, how are your and I think maybe when she came to 8 MRS. APRIL: Off the record. 9 the firm I had a brief discussion with her. 9 (WHEREUPON, an off-the-record discussion 10 O Do you know if she ever worked for any 10 was had). 11 Federal agency, did she ever mention that? 11 BY MRS. APRIL: 12 A She might have worked for the FBI now that 12 O I started to say that I had asked you 13 I think about it. 13 before the break about the investigative entity for 14 O And what makes you think that? 14 which Mr. Jenne and Mr. Flston may have worked, and I 35 A Something she — 15 think I may have misspoken. I said something about 16 Q You think she mentioned it? 16 Blue Line. Did you ever hoar of something called 27 A I don't know if it would have come from her 17 "Blue Line Research & Development"? 18 or someone else. I don't know. 18 A No. I heard something about Blue Line. but 19 O Do you know what — 19 I don't know the name of a specific entity if there 20 A Although, I'm not positive of that either. 20 Is an entity by that name, Research 8 Development. I 21 It just, that kind of triggered it when you said 21 wouldn't know that. 22 that. I'm not certain. 22 O Rick Fandrey, do you know who that was? 23 O Did you have any other people at the firm, 23 A Does not nng a bell 24 attorneys who had a background in law enforcement 24 O And you mentioned earlier I think that 25 like the FBI? Patrick Roberts you believe was affiliated with the United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608564 29 (Pages 113 to 116 Page 113 Page 11 1 Investigative Unit is that correct? 1 MRS. APRIL: I'm asking him. I don't know 2 A Yes. 2 what capacity he would have seen them, but he 3 Q Do you know if he had a background in law 3 will answer or not, so -- 4 enforcement? 4 A I really don't recall. to tell you the 5 A He was with Alcohol — Yeah, ABT. 5 truth, one way or the other. I don't think so. 6 Q Do you know someone named Wayne Black? 6 O Michael Szafranski, did you know such a 7 A That name rings a bell. It rings a bell I 7 person? 8 can't place what bell. 8 A Yes. 9 Q Do you know if he's affiliated with any 9 Q Who was Michael Szalranski? 10 investigative efforts? 10 A Hedge fund guy. 11 A I don't l'rn trying to place that name in 11 O And when you say "hedge fund guy," did you 12 my mind. I know the name, I just don't know where I 12 know anything more than that about him? I mean, was 13 know it from 13 he the operator of a hedge fund? 14 O Have you ever been convicted of a crime? 14 A I dtdn't know any details other than that 15 A No 15 he would do stuff with Scott, he was involved with 16 O Good. I had asked you some questions 16 Scott 17 earlier. In going through my notes, I see I forgot 17 O Did you have occasion to meet him or be 18 to ask you this one that may ring a bell. 18 Introduced to him casually or at a restaurant or 19 Clinton, President Clinton, do you know was 19 something? 20 he a deposition that you had ever been advised was 20 A He was around. At one point he was using 21 planned? 21 an office down on the 15th floor. 22 A I don't recall -- 22 O How many floors did you occupy at RRA at 23 MR. KING: Objection. Objection to mat on 23 that building where the offices were, Bank of America 24 the basis of privilege, work-product. 24 building? 25 A But I don't recall any way, so it doesn't 25 A Well, we need to have a point in time. Page 114 Page 1 1 6 1 matter. O At the end, 2009? 2 O Do you ever— l asked you about Rick 2 A At the end we had space on 22. 16 and 15. 3 Fandrey, you said you don't know that name? 3 And then there was one other — there was a couple of 4 A Correct 4 other spaces. But I think they also might have been 5 O Michael Legamaro, have you ever heard of an 5 on 15. but I'm not sure, or they might have been on 6 attorney with that name? 6 one other floor. 7 A Legamaro. 7 O What floor were you on at that time? 8 Q L-e-g-a-m-a-r-o? 8 A I was always on 16. 9 A Never heard of him. 9 O And when you said that Mr. Szatranskl was 10 CI Did you ever meet any attorney who might 10 at some point using some space, do you know what 11 have been visiting the firm In October 2009 from the 11 floor he was on? 12 firm of Morgan, Lewis from Chicago? 12 A 15. 13 A No. 13 O As far as you knew, it was Scott who said 14 O S do you know that name or 14 ho could use the space and Scott who dealt with him? 15 that person? 15 A Yeah. He dean with Scott. My 16 A No 16 understanding was he would-- he had some invoNement 17 Q Did you ever see any flight logs or 17 in funding deals, Scott's deals or something. 18 documents that were purportedly flight logs from an 18 O And those deals, was Scott an Investor, was 19 Epstein airplane? 19 that your understanding? 20 MR. KING: Same objection 20 A Yes 21 THE WITNESS: If I ever saw them? 21 Q How long did you know Scott Rothstein 22 MRS. APRIL: Ifs been testified to by two 22 before, well, at the time of the — either way, when 23 non-parties. 23 you Joined the firm? 2005 you joined, right? 24 MR. KING: You're asking him in his 24 A I knew fam from law school as an 25 capacity as an attorney -- acquaintance. I knew him from undergrad, University United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608565 30 (Pages 117 to 120) Page 117 Page 119 1 of Florida. as not even an acquaintance. lie was just 1 staff and let me bring my lawyers with me. because I 2 a student there and we both worked security at 2 liked the people who I worked with. 3 concerts together, believe it or not. But I don't 3 Q Did you talk at that time to the other half 4 even think I ever even said hello to him, because I 4 a dozen lawyers who were in the existing Rothstein 5 just didn't know him or associate with him in 5 firm? 6 college. In law school, it was just, Hi, how are you 6 A Well. I knew Stuart Rosenfeldt because he 7 doing? 7 was actually involved on a case I had years before. 8 Q How did it occur that he offered you a 8 So I knew him as an acquaintance, spoke to him. And 9 position at the film? 9 I might have said hello to some of the other lawyers 10 A After law school I had lunch with him maybe 10 there, but basically it was Scott and Stuart. It was 11 four or five times because my cases have always come 11 always Scott and Stuart's firm even to the end. 12 from other lawyers, my personal injury cases. So 12 O Were you ever aware, did you ever hear that 13 part of my marketing routine is to take other lawyers 13 persons who were not part of your finn were shown 14 to lunch who do not do personal injury in hopes of 14 portions of Epstein's files by Scott Rothstein? 15 developing referral relationships. 15 A At what point in time? 16 And so in either, it was probably late-2004 16 Q At any point in time. 17 I had lunch with Scott and I was telling him about my 17 A I only heard that sometime in 2010 after 18 interest in technology. I was paperiess at my firm 18 information started coming out about what he had been 19 at the time, and I said, It's the greatest thing. 19 doing. So the answer is: Never during the time that 20 You gotta see it. 20 I worked at the RRA firm. 21 So he came over to my office and he saw it. 21 CI Did you ever hear that Scott Rothstein 22 He wanted to do it as well and I was helping him. 22 showed other files relating to clients of RRA to 23 And I said to him, words to the effect of, you know. 23 persons who were not part of the firm when the firm 24 I would appreciate ft if you would send me some 24 still existed? 25 personal injury cases. I mean, I help my friends 25 A Same answer as my last answer. I only know Page 118 Page 120 1 with technology. If you have any PI cases, why don't 1 what I had read in the paper and just, you know, 2 you send me some? 2 heard. That's all 2010 and after. 3 And then he said, Well, why don't you join 3 O Did you ever gat to meet Man Dershowitz? 4 our law firm. We don't have a Personal Injury 4 A Nope. Oh, yes, I did get to meet him. 5 Department and you could be that. And I saw it as a 5 O He was at the deposition of Epstein, wasn't 6 great opportunity and that's how it came about. 6 he? 7 Q why did you think ft was a great 7 A Not the one that I went to. I met hum at a 8 opportunity? 8 Nova Southeastern University event at the Signature 9 A Because they had about seven -- they had Grande. 10 about seven lawyers at the time. They did not do 10 O Stuart's client? I don't know if it was 11 personal injury. They had just made a deal to 11 Stuart's client at the time. 12 acquire Steve Lichtman's firm, which is commercial 12 A They were Stuart's client at the time. 13 litigation, and I just saw it as an opportunity for 13 Yes, they were. 14 me to not have to deal with the administrative 14 CI Prior to October 31st, 2009 had you ever 15 aspects of practicing law. That was one of the 15 heard of the 03 Capital Club? 16 things. 16 A The answer is: No, and I don't think I 17 Number two, there would be referral sources 17 have ever heard of that before you just said it to 18 and cases being brought in by other lawyers in the 18 me. 19 firm who did not do personal injury, so that appealed 19 O Again, let's break it down by date. Prior 20 to me. And, of course, the fact that the firm was 20 to that date, I'm using Halloween of 2009, had you 21 going to fund the costs in my cases as opposed to my 21 ever met someone named A.J. DiScala? 22 funding it out of my own pocket, so it took a lot of 22 A No. 23 financial stress off of me. I knew that Scott was 23 CI Dean Kretschinar, did you know him? 24 ambitious and I trusted him at the time, so it seemed 24 A I don't think so, no. 25 like a good fit. And, you know, he agreed to hire my 25 • Did you ever meet - and when I say "meet," United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608566 31 (Pages 121 to 124) Page 121 Page 123 1 I mean in any way, just a hand shake in the lobby — 1 A I have never seen it, that's correct. 2 A No. I understand 2 Q I want to clarify a couple of things. Mr. 3 0 —someone named Thane Ritchey? 3 Edwards has testified at his deposition - and I have 4 A Thane. who? 4 Kin the room if you want to see it - that he 5 Q Thane Ritchey. And It sounds like a movie 5 discussed the Epstein cases with you on a regular 6 star or something, but he's a guy. 6 basis, Is that a true statement? 7 A No. 7 A In a general sense, yes. Specifically, as Q I think it's your testimony this morning 8 I said, there were issues that might have come up 9 that you never know that Scott Rothstein was 9 where he would ask me about or bounce things off of 10 purporting to sell structured settlement investments, 10 me. 11 Is that correct? 11 CI And If I were to ask you those issues, you 12 A I always knew that Scott invested with 12 would say It's work-product? 13 other people, but I never knew that other people 13 A Correct. Although, I will tell you that my 14 invested with Scott. 14 answer applies to all of his cases and everyone 15 Q Did Scott, to your knowledge, or any of the 15 else's cases. I try to keep an overall understanding 16 Investments that he said he was making, were they in 16 of what's going on with people's cases, because I 17 structured settlements? 17 always wanted to help and see where they were. 18 A He never said that phrase to me, 18 Q He also testified - and, again, I can show 19 "structured settlements" and he never got real 19 It to you if you like. I brought it so it would be 20 specific with me about his investments other than 20 convenient • that you worked on the Epstein files, is 21 those that were just outwardly known to people. 21 that a true statement? 22 Q Like the watches? 22 MR. KING: Objection to form. 23 A The watch company, the Vodka company, you 23 A Well, it's true to the extent that I 24 know, houses that he owned, cars. 24 testified to today. If there is anything else 25 O Tangible things? 25 specifically that he said, I'd like to know about it Page 122 Page 121 1 A The restaurant. Just things that he made 1 Because you gotta remember that, I was responsible 2 it known about. Gibraltar Bank towards the end. 2 for overseeing all of the cases in my division, over 3 things like that. Everybody knew that he invested in 3 nine lawyers. including class-action, mass tort, 4 those things, but he never sat down and told me the 4 general liability, premises liability, medical mal. 5 specifics of all of his investments or other S All of those things. So when you ask me those 6 investments that weren't widely known. 6 questions, you know, that's one of the reasons why -- 7 Q Did he ever invite you to join him in any 7 And. oh, by the way, I had a very large caseload 8 of those investments? 8 myself. 9 A Did he ever invite me? Early on in 2005, I 9 Q Yes. 10 think it was, it might have been 2006, there was a 10 A I personally worked on my own cases every 11 townhouse project. I think I spoke about this in my 11 day. So, did I do some work on the Epstein case? 12 Trustee deposition. There was a townhouse project 12 I'm sure I did. I told you the extent of what I 13 that had to be completed and he needed money, or 13 remembered. But you gotta also remember that, I was 14 whatever. And he said I would get a lot of money 14 inquisitive about every lawyers cases in my group 15 back. I actually took out a home equity line on my 15 because I was a real take-charge person from an 16 house for $100,000 and I gave him a check for the 16 administrative viewpoint just about making sure cases 17 $100,000. 17 were being litigated, that the lawyers had anything 18 So, the answer to that extent is yes. 18 they needed to do. that they were happy, that they 19 That's the only thing that I was ever really invited 19 were well-staffed, and things like that. 20 to participate in. And I lost money on it, by the 20 O Do you know whether the Epstein cases were, 21 way. I got back about 80,000 over time. so I was out 21 I'm not sure of the verb for this, whether that QTASK 22 about 20 grand. 22 was used for any of the Epstein cases? 23 Q I think you testified earlier that you had 23 A I'm sure it was used to some extent. 24 not ever seen Brad Edwards' deposition that he had 24 Q Earlier I did ask you a question - and I 25 given in this case? 25 think that Mr. King objected and maybe you declined United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608567 32 (Pages 125 to 128, Page 125 Page 127 1 to answer as well - concerning whether you had ever 1 Earleen Coat (pronouncing)? 2 had any discussions about the value of the Epstein 2 A Cote (pronouncing), C-o-t-e. Cote 3 cases. 3 Q Do you know whether she had any Involvement 4 Mr. Edwards testified in response to this 4 of any type in the Epstein cases? 5 question, Page 292 of his deposition, that he gave on 5 A To the best of knowledge, no. She's an 6 March 23rd of last year. He was asked this question: 6 insurance defense lawyer. That's what they do, 7 "QUESTION: Did you ever have a 7 Insurance defense work. 8 conversation with other attorneys regarding the 8 CI Do you know whether Brad Edwards continued 9 value of the Epstein cases that you had? 9 to have a friendly relationship with her at the time 10 "ANSWER: Yes. 10 that he was at FtRA? 11 "QUESTION: Okay. With whom? 11 A Yeah. I think he was friendly with her, 12 "ANSWER: Russell Adler, Bill Berger. I 12 but he was friendly with a lot of people. 13 believe that's it." 13 Q Do you remember Brad Edwards showing you 14 Do you concur with that? 14 drafts of pleadings or documents to be filed In the 15 A If that's what he said then I probably did. 15 Epstein case for your review? I'm talking before 16 I just don't remember specific conversations with him 16 they were filed. 17 about that. 17 A Not specifically. So he may have. but 18 O Did you know or hear that Mr. Epstein was a 18 maybe not. That's a tough one, because I saw a lot 19 wealthy man? 19 of pleadings and things from a lot of cases that 20 A I heard. 20 other lawyers who worked in my group would ask me 21 Q What did you hear about his wealth? 21 about or that I would review for them, or whatever 22 A That he was very wealthy and he was a hedge 22 Q Let me show you an e-mail that is not in 23 fund guy from New York City. And just for the sake 23 the restricted category, it's not an 24 of completeness, you know, I was always concerned 24 attorney's-eyes-only document, from Brad Edwards to about the value of all of the cases in the Personal 25 you dated April 15, 2009. This is what I'm going to Page 126 Page 128 1 and in the Toil Division, it's a part of keeping 1 show? 2 track of a tort practice group. 2 MR. KING: You said it's not in a restricted 3 O You must have also been interested In 3 category. Which category is it? Where did it 4 collectibility, that's part of it, Isn't it? 4 cane from? 5 A Yes. Of course. 5 MRS. APRIL: Well, it was from a category 6 Cl Do you know how much money the Rothstein, 6 called irrelevant, but not an eyes-only or under 7 Rosenfeldt 8. Adler firm invested - that may be the 7 any confidentiality in this case. It's a bit of s wrong word • advanced to support the Epstein cases? 8 a challenge to figure out. And in an abundance 9 A I have no idea. Assuming they did. 9 of caution, I'm not going to make it an exhibit 10 Q I'm sorry, you said — 10 in case this deposition should be filed, but 11 A I said, assuming that they did. 11 I'm going to show it to him to refresh his 12 Q You don't know that they did? 12 memory. 13 A I never out or signed one check while I was 13 MR. KING: My understanding from the order, 14 at that firm for the firm 14 and take another look at it, but I read the 15 O Do you know whether any depositions were 15 order as none of those documents could be 16 taken during the time that you were aware of it? 16 used with respect to any particular witness or 17 A I believe they were, but I don't know if 17 disclosure of any of these documents unless and 18 the bills were paid. Bills were submitted to the 18 until the court ordered it, whether it was based 19 Bookkeeping Department and checks were issued from 19 on the category of relevance or it was based on 20 the Bookkeeping Department. You know, I wasn't 20 the for-eyes-only category. 21 Involved in that, per se, unless there was an issue 21 MRS. APRIL: All right. Then let me ask 22 with bills not getting paid that would come to my 22 you this: Since Mr. Adler is somebody who is 23 attention. cost bills. 23 claiming work-product and was at the firm, if 24 Q You had mentioned to me the name of an 24 you object to me showing him these documents - I 25 attorney I think at Kubicki, Draper earlier today, 25 won't, but I thought it might prevent hxn from United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608568 33 (Pages 129 to 132) Page 129 Page 131 1 coming back at a later lime - but If you have an 1 to answer? 2 objection. I won't show it to him. 2 MR. KING: Yes. 3 MR. KING: I do. And it also goes to 3 MRS. APRIL: Okay. I guess you can't have 4 work-product, so that would cover that as 4 it both ways, because I imagine on some of this 5 well. 5 he might say, no. I don't remember, and that 6 MRS. APRIL: Well, the problem I have is, 6 would be done. Okay, as you wish. 7 none of them were stamped like I would do with 7 MR. KING: And that eliminates the need for 8 work-product. any motions on a particular question if he 9 MR. KING: I don't know what happened with 9 doesn't have a recollection. So I invite him, 10 regard to them. 10 if he can state that he has no recollection of 11 MRS. APRIL: I don? either. It's a 11 the matter. that would not -- 12 nightmare. 12 THE WITNESS: Fine. I will tell you this 13 MR. KING: You read the order differently? 13 and I don't think this is going to offend 14 MRS. APRIL: Well, is it the confidentiality 14 anybody, I remember Judge Hafele had one of the 15 order that was never signed or is there another 15 cases. I don't specifically remember Brad 16 order -- 16 telling me he missed the hearing, but he may 17 Let's go off the record for a minute. 17 have. Who knows. 18 (WHEREUPON, an off-the-record discussion was 18 BY MRS. APRIL: 19 had). 19 O Were you ever acquainted with a Dr. Swan 20 MRS. APRIL: Let's go back on the record. 20 who was a psychologist or psychiatrist? 21 BY MRS. APRIL: 21 A Yes. She was — Yes I met her one 22 Cr I am not going to show you certain documents 22 lime. 23 because in an abundance of caution perhaps there's an 23 O Do you know if she was retained by your 24 Interpretation that says I should not SO I will try 24 firm to work on anything? 25 to ask my questions in such a way that If you can 25 A I will assert work-product privilege as to Page 130 Page 132 1 answer them, then answer them. If not — 1 the answer to that question. 2 But I will say, so it's a matter of record, 2 Q I think earlier, quite earlier In the 3 that to the extent that there are some answers that 3 deposition you had mentioned that Brad Edwards at 4 we don't get and there is a court ruling on any of 4 some point had an assistant or legal assistant named 5 this and we need to show it to you, we'll have you 5 Jackie? 6 back. We'll subpoena you again. 6 A Yes. 7 A I guess that's up to the judge. 7 CI Do you know if she was still working with 8 Q Right. You're not retiring to another 8 him In October right before the firm broke up? 9 country any time soon, are you? 9 A I think so. but I'm not positive. 10 A I have no plans to do that presently. 10 CI I think your testimony earlier was at one 1.1 CI Do you remember Brad Edwards ever 11 point he had his own assistant? 12 communicating with you verbally or in an e-mail that 12 A Correct 13 he had missed a hearing in an Epstein case and it was 13 Q I was trying to determine the point. Was 14 transferred to Judge Hafele? Do you ever remember 14 she with him at the very beginning? 15 having any communication about that? 15 A No 16 A Would that be work-product? 16 Q Have you seen a document that was submitted 17 MR. KING: Can I have the question back? 17 to Judge Carney. the Special Master in this case, le (WHEREUPON, the requested testimony was 18 from Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley that 19 read baCk by the court reporter). 19 provided him with a master contact list of names? 20 MR. KING: I think in an abundance of 20 Did you ever see that? 21 caution, I think that falls within work-product. 21 A Nope. I believe that would have to have 22 I think once you start opening the door as to 22 been after 2009. right? 23 even a conversation about something that may 23 Q Yes. 24 have occurred in court, I think that would be — 24 A The answer is absolutely no. 25 MRS. APRIL: So you're instructing him not 25 O March of this year? United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608569 34 (Pages 133 to 136) Page 133 Page i 1 A Nope. 1 A Yes. 2 O Did you do anything to prepare for this 2 O To your knowledge, did he provide any legal 3 deposition today, look at any documents or have any 3 services with respect to the Epstein cases? 4 meetings? 4 A Not to my knowledge. but he may have 5 A Other than what I've testified to. no. 5 Q And Carl Linder worked In the same practice 6 O What did you testify to? I didn't hear you 6 area? 7 talk about that. 7 A As Denis Kleinfeld, yes. A Other than a brief conversation with Brad 8 O Elizabeth Kim, was she a paralegal attached 9 Edwards where I told him about the fact that I 9 to your group? 10 believe there's going to be a lot of work-product 10 A Yes. 11 that's going to be asked about. 11 O Do you know if she worked on the Epstein 12 O Other than the Brad Edwards conversation — 12 cases? 13 A Nope. 13 A I don't know. I don't recall. 14 O - and shortly before we began today? 14 O Elizabeth Vetter, V-I-Ilia-r, do you know 15 Do you know someone named Christina Fitch 15 who she was? 16 who is described as having been a staff member at 16 A Yes. 17 RRA? 17 Q Was she in your practice area? 18 A Yes 18 A I'm trying to put the name with the face. 19 O Who was she and what was her function, If 19 I think I know who she is, And if I'm correct. she 20 you know? 20 worked in real estate, but I'm not positive. 21 A She started out as a clerical employee in 21 O Was Grant Smith an attorney at RRA during 22 my practice group and she ended up being a secretary, 22 the time you were there? 23 being promoted. 23 A Yes. 24 O Did she work with Mr. Edwards at all, do 24 O What practice area was he? 25 you know? 25 A He didn't really practice, per se. He was Page 134 Page 136 1 A She did things for pretty much everybody in 1 involved on the political side, the lobbying. He was 2 the tort group here and there. 2 a politico kind of guy. And toward the very end he 3 Q Did you ever hear of an attorney named Alan 3 got some administrative spot within the firm. 4 Garten, Gat-ta-n? 4 assistant something or other. 5 A Garten? 5 Q Do you know whether he had any involvement 6 O Yes. 6 whatsoever with any of the cases against Jeffrey 7 A No. 7 Epstein? O Adam Steinberg, was he a member of your 8 A Who. 9 group? 9 Q Grant Smith? 10 A No. He was not a member of the tort 10 A To my knowledge, he had nothing to do with 11 group. 11 it. But once again, he may have. On a regular basis 12 () Was he an attorney at RRA? 12 lawyers in that firm would reach out to other lawyers 13 A Yes. 13 who had knowledge in certain subjects or to do 14 Q What was his practice area? 14 certain things or to assist them or maybe they were 15 A Commercial litigation. 15 free, or whatever. But, you know, it didn't have to 16 O Beth Williamson, did she work as a 16 go through me if it involved those cases 17 paralegal with your group? 1? necessarily. 18 A Yes. 18 O Well, I understand. You did say that. But 19 O I had asked you earlier If you knew anyone 19 in the case of Mr. Smith, for example, who was a 20 named Howell, but I didn't have at my fingertips the 20 lobbyist do you know whether or not he did any 21 complete name. An attorney named Jay Howell, does 21 hands-on legal work on the cases? 22 that mean anything to you? 22 A To my knowledge. he did not. 23 A Nope. 23 (WHEREUPON, an off-the-record discussion 24 Q Denis Klelnfeld, he was also an attorney at 24 was had). 25 RRA when you were there, right? 25 BY MRS. APRIL: United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608570 37 (Pages 145 to 148) EFTA00608571 38 (Pages 149 to 152) Page 149 Page 151 1 Identify them as work-product? Yes, I have the 1 up. Is that what you're saying? 2 e-mail. 2 THE WITNESS: That is what I'm saying. I 3 A As I stated before. I believe I have an 3 will not come back here voluntarily. If the 4 obligation to do that and I will. 4 judge orders me to re-appear to answer those S Q Do I need to subpoena you further for that 5 questions, that's fine. 6 or can we just agree that you will do that? 6 And the reason for that comes back to the 7 A A subpoena would be unnecessary. An e-mail 7 fact that I gave deposition testimony In a case 8 would be nice. I think there was something else I 8 with a completely different procedural posture 9 told you earlier that I would look for. I think it 9 than this one and I have asserted the 10 has to do with e-mails between me and Brad Edwards 10 work-product privilege, because I believe that 11 before he joined the firm. 11 it applies in these specific situations. 12 Q That's right. 12 In other words. it may well be that in one 13 A If you would just send me an e-mail to that 13 context information is work-product privilege, :4 effect, I would be happy to look it up for you to 14 but in another context it isn't. And if that's 15 either produce it to Brad's lawyer or to assert 15 the case. that's why I insist on an order :6 privilege and identify what I have. 16 directing me to appear and testify and answer 17 MRS. APRIL: That would be fine. 17 those questions. I think that's reasonable. 18 MR. KING: Would you be kind enough to 18 MRS. APRIL: I think without necessarily 19 copy Jack Scarola on that e-mail? 19 agreeing to the procedure. I think that if such 20 MRS. APRIL: Uh-huh (affirmative response). 20 time comes as the court finds a waiver or a 21 MR. KING: And his secretary Mary. 21 partial waiver or something, we can work it out. 22 rnpp@searcy 22 CROSS EXAMINATION 23 MRS. APRIL: Yes. I know Mary. 23 BY MR. KING: 24 A It appears from the answers I gave in the 24 Cl I only have one area to inquire about and 25 deposition that at the time we had this -- we were 25 that was relating to how Brad ended up getting to the Page 150 Page 152 1 called in for the meeting there were Epstein files 1 firm. I just want to make sure there is no 2 present in Scott's office. But you're correct, I 2 Inconsistency between what you've recounted here 3 never directly linked the two together in my answer. 3 earlier and Brad's testimony. 4 I can only go by my best recollection which is 4 He had recalled that when the two of you S really, truly contained in those answers. 5 would meet at the gym that there were occasions In 6 Q Prior to today have you had any 6 which you inquired of him whether he would be 7 conversations with anybody at the firm of Searcy, 7 interested in coming with the firm and that you 8 Denney concerning this lawsuit? 8 talked to him about the good people who were at the 9 A hope. 9 firm and the good comradery at the !inn. Do you 10 MRS. APRIL: I do not have any other 10 recall conversations along those lines? 11 questions. I am reserving the right to ask you 11 A Sure. And anyone who I respected as a 12 to come back if, in fact, the privilege issues 12 personal injury lawyer, I would always put the word 13 are determined and it is still necessary. 13 out that we were looking to grow our practice group. 14 THE WITNESS: I will come back if and only 14 And, you know, I mean, I had a really prominent group 15 if I am ordered to do so by the judge. But if 15 of lawyers there 16 he orders me to come back and answer certain 16 O This was not a situation where Bradley was 17 things, I will do exactly as he tells me to 17 seeking out the job with your firm this was a 18 do. 18 situation where you came to him, ultimately, and 19 MRS. APRIL. Well, we don't have to quibble 19 followed It up and asked him to meet with Rothstein 20 about how that works, because if he rules and 20 relating to joining the firm? 21 we have a court order that says certain things 21 A Correct. As a result of the phone call he 22 are not work-product and we send you a subpoena: 22 made to me after my verdict I got in Palm Beach. 23 I'm not sure if that's what you're talking 23 MR. KING: Very good. That's all I have. 24 about or if you're saying you need to have a 24 MRS. APRIL: You have the right to read 25 specific court order that says you need to show 25 this, as I'm sure you know. United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608572 39 (Pages 153 to 156) Page 153 Page 155 1 THE WITNESS: I know. 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2 MRS. APRIL: Do you want to? 2 STATE OF FLORIDA ) 3 THE WITNESS: Yes. )ss 3 COUNTY OF BROWARD ) 4 MRS. APRIL: He does not waive. He reads. 4 I. Lee Lynott, Certified Shorthand Reporter and 5 We'll order it. 5 Registered Merit Reporter in and for the County of 6 MR. KING: We'll get a copy. 6 Broward. State of Florida, do hereby certify: 7 (WHEREUPON, the deposition Concluded at 7 That prior to being examined RUSSELL S. ADLER, 8 3:00 p.m. and the witness chose to Read and 8 the witness named in the foregoing deposition, was 9 9 duty sworn by the undersigned to testify to the Sign). 10 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 10 11 That said deposition was taken before me at the 11 12 time and place set forth and was taken down by me in 12 13 shorthand and thereafter reduced to computerized 13 14 transcription under my direction and supervision, and 14 15 I hereby certify the foregoing is a full, true and 15 16 correct transcript of my shorthand notes so taken. 16 17 I further certify that I am neither counsel for 18 nor related to any party to said action nor in 17 19 anywise interested in the outcome thereof. 18 20 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed 19 21 my name this 6th day of May 2011. 20 22 21 Lee Lynott, RMR, RPR 22 23 Notary Public. State of Florida MY COMMISSION I 00996092 23 24 EXPIRES: June 29. 2014 24 Notary Public Underwriters 25 Page 154 Page 3 . • i CERTIFICATE OF OATH 2 READ NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA ) 2 3 3 4 May 5, 2011 COUNTY OF BROWARD ) 5 4 6 Russell S. Adler 5 I, Lee Lynott. Certified Merit Reporter, 401 East Las Olas Boulevard 6 Notary Public, State of Florida. certify that RUSSELL 7 Suite 1400 7 S. ADLER personally appeared before me on the 20th 8 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 8 day of April 2011 and was duly sworn. 9 9 Signed this 5th day of May 2011. IN RE: Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein, et al., 10 10 11 11 Dear fer. Adler. Lee Lynott. RMR, RPR 12 Please be advised that your deposition given on April 20, 2011 is ready for your Reading and Signing. 12 Notary Public, State of Florida 13 MY COMMISSION it 00996092 Please contact our offices to make arrangements to 13 EXPIRES: June 29, 2014 14 Read your deposition transcript within 30 days from Notary Public Underwriters receipt. However, if you have decided not to Read 14 15 and Sign. please let us know as soon as possible. 16 If you should have any questions, please do not 15 hesitate to cat 16 17 17 Sincerely. 18 18 19 19 20 Lee Lynott, RMR 20 Court Reporter 21 21 cc: Service List 22 22 23 23 24 24 25 25 United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608573 40 (Page 157) Page 157 1 ERRATA SHEET 2 I. the undersigned. FtU8ein I S. ADLER. do hereby certify that I Mire read the forst:Eng deposition end that to the best of my knaMedge. sad deposition is true and accurate (with the exception of the 4 following carts bled below): 5 PAOFJUNE CORRECTION REASON FOR CORRECTION 6 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 See attached sheet(s) for additional informal= Yes No 17 18 STATE OF ) ss : 19 COUNTY OF 20 Subscribed and sworn to before me. this day of 2011. 11. 22 Russel S. Adler Date 23 Notary Pubic Date 24 My commission expires: United Reporting, Inc. 954-525-2221 EFTA00608574 EFTA00608575 EFTA00608576