EFTA00234871Dataset 9
2009-06-1941p9,427w
…unsecured."); Fla. Stat. Ann. § (defining creditor protected by the act as "a person who has a claim"). See generally Freeman v. First Union Nat. Bank, 865 So.2d 1272, 1277 (Fla. 2004) (noting that the definition of 13 EFTA00234883 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 165 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2009 Page 14 of 41 CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON claim is "broadly constructed" under the FUFTA). This means that "as is universally accepted, as…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00234871.pdf
EFTA00590248Dataset 9
2015-05-1538p9,499w
…issue. Moreover, BSF's public announcement — which was presumably made with the permission of its client — waives any possible claim of privilege with respect to the fee agreements and retainers entered into between BSF and Jane Doe No. 3. It is hornbook law that the voluntary public disclosure of facts that might otherwise be privileged waives privilege as to the entire subject matter. E.g., First Union Nat'l Bank of Fla. v. Whitener, 715 So. 2d 979, 984 (Fla…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00590248.pdf
EFTA00805367Dataset 9
2018-03-0822p7,118w
…Tobacco Co. v. State, 697 So. 2d 1249, 1253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). "If a client communicates with an attorney 17 EFTA00805383 in order to obtain advice or assistance in perpetrating what the client knows to be a crime or fraud, the communication loses its privileged character." First Union Nat? Bank v. Turney, 824 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). The privilege "cannot prevent the disclosure of communications made in contemplation of a crime or the perpetration of a…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00805367.pdf
EFTA00805501Dataset 9
2017-10-059p2,899w
…State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 693 So. 2d 707, 708 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (specifically denying consideration of unverified documents, stating that "[a]t this point in time, they're nothing more than unverified hearsay, which cannot be considered by the Court ..."); First Union Nat'l Bank of Fla. v. Ruiz, 785 So. 2d 589, 591 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) ("[M]erely attaching an unswom document ... does not . . . satisfy the procedural strictures inherent in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00805501.pdf
EFTA00800866Dataset 9
2018-03-029p2,944w
…at 4. But Epstein provides no supporting evidence for this assertion, or indeed an evidence of any production to anyone that was unprotected, in the Razorback litigation or any other litigation for that matter. Epstein's unsupported speculation about what "appears" to him to have occurred can hardly constitute the specific evidence of an "intentional" waiver that would be required to pierce the attorney-client privilege. Cf. First Union Nat. Bank of Fla. v. Whitener, 715 So. 2d 979, 984…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00800866.pdf
EFTA01120045Dataset 9
2010-11-046p1,382w
…177, 185 (M.D. Fla. 1973) (ordering in camera inspection of answers to interrogatories). Before production to Edwards can be ordered, Epstein is entitled to an evidentiary hearing at which he will bear the burden of persuasion. BNP Paribas, 967 So. 2d at 1068; First Union Nat'l Bank v. Turney, 824 So. 2d 172, 183-84 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). But, in light of the prima facie presentation on the crime-fraud exception, Epstein's blanket privilege objections will…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01120045.pdf
EFTA01132348Dataset 9
2013-09-167p1,834w
…v. Continental Cas. Co., 556 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1990); First Union Nat'l Bank v. Whitener, 715 So. 2d 979, 982 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)). The client is then entitled to provide a reasonable explanation for the communication at an evidentiary hearing. Id. Finally, the record evidence must specifically show that the attorney assisted in the crime or fraud. First Union Nat. Bank of Fla. v. Whitener, 715 So. 2d 979, 983 (Ha. 5th DCA 1998…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01132348.pdf
EFTA00802962Dataset 9
2017-08-306p2,013w
…Circle Prop. Owners' Ass'n, 957 So. 2d 1207, 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). "Any litigant must demonstrate that he or she has standing to invoke the power of the court to determine the merits of an issue." Vaughan v. First Union Nat'l Bank of Fla, 740 So. 2d 1216, 1217 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). "Standing depends on whether a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy, with a legally cognizable interest which would be affected by…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00802962.pdf
EFTA01103302Dataset 9
2009-12-0719p5,830w
…clear that none of the Supporting Papers, save 5 Other courts of appeal have held the same. See, e.g., Nichols v. Preiser, 849 So. 2d 478, 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (trial court could not consider letters that were not sworn or certified); First Union Nat? Bank ofFla. V. Ruiz, 785 So. 2d 589, 591 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (unsworn EEOC letter did not satisfy procedural strictures inherent in Rule 1.510(e)); Brooker v. Sarasota, Inc., 707 So…
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01103302.pdf