| --- |
| title: "House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12) (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013399)" |
| source: "House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12)" |
| sourceUrl: "https://www.justice.gov/epstein" |
| date: "2026-01-01" |
| category: "House Oversight" |
| eftaNumber: "HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013399" |
| ocrPages: 1 |
| ocrChars: 1810 |
| ocrElapsed: 0.0 |
| parseTier: "external-legacy" |
| engine: "engine undisclosed (ep-nov-12.greg.technology mirror)" |
| externalSource: "greg-ep-nov-12" |
| externalLicense: "not granted" |
| externalCredit: "ep-nov-12.greg.technology" |
| externalUrl: "https://ep-nov-12.greg.technology" |
| --- |
| |
| Edwards adv. Epstein |
| Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG |
| Second Renewed Motion for Leave to Assert Claim for Punitive Damages |
| confidentiality terms required by Epstein, the cases did not settle for the "minimal value" that |
| Epstein suggested in his Complaint. |
| Because Epstein relies upon the alleged discrepancy |
| between the "minimal value" Epstein ascribed to the claims and the substantial value Edwards |
| sought to recover for his clients, the settlement amounts Epstein voluntarily agreed to pay while |
| these claims against Edwards were pending will be disclosed to the court in-camera. |
| B. Summary of the Argument |
| The claims against Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., were frivolous for at least three separate |
| • -reasons.' |
| -....... |
| First, because Epstein elected to hide behind the shield of his right against self. a |
| incrimination to preclude his disclosing any relevant information about the criminal activity at |
| the center of his claims, he was barred from prosecuting his case against Edwards. Under the |
| well-established "sword and shield" doctrine, Epstein could not legitimately seek damages from |
| Edwards while at the same time asserting a Fifth Amendment privilege to block relevant |
| discovery. His case was therefore subject to summary judgment and on the eve of the hearing |
| seeking that summary judgment Epstein effectively conceded that fact by voluntarily dismissing |
| his claims. |
| Second, all of Edwards' conduct in the prosecution of valid claims against Epstein was |
| protected by the litigation privilege, a second absolute legal bar to Epstein's claims effectively |
| conceded by his voluntary dismissal. |
| Third, and most fundamentally, Epstein's lawsuit was not only unsupported by both the |
| applicable law, it was based on unsupported factual allegations directly contradicted by all of the |
| 6 |
| HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013399 |
|
|
