# IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

# CRIMINAL DIVISION

STATE OF FLORIDA

vs.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN

Case Nos.: 2006
2008-9381CF-AXX

BEACH JUN JUN 26 AM 8:58 FILED
CLERK

# INTERVENOR PALM BEACH POST'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS

Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a The Palm Beach Post (the st") moves this Court for an award of attorneys' fees and costs in connection with this ma ter. In support thereof, the Post states:

NOT A CERNED

1. The Post is a daily newspaper that has vered this matter and related proceedings. In an effort to inform its readers con erning these matters, the Post relies upon (among other things) law enforcement record and judicial records.

2. On June 10, 2009, the granted the Post's Motion to Intervene in this action for the purpose of seeking access to court records. Specifically, the Post sought access to a non- prosecution agreement that was docketed on July 2, 2008, and an addendum docketed on August 25, 2008.

3. On June 25, 2009, the Court heard oral argument on the Post's (and other non- parties') motions. The Court found that the documents has not properly been sealed in the first instance and further denied Defendant's Motion to Make Court Records Confidential dated June 11, 2009.

4. The Post is entitled to its fess and costs in this matter pursuant to Administrative Order Number 2.303 of this Court. Specifically, Rule 2.303 allows sanctions to be imposed

against the moving party "if a motion to seal is not made in good faith and is not supported by a sound legal and factual basis." Admin. Or. 15th Jud. Cir. Fla. 2.303.

5. In this case, Mr. Epstein's Motion to Make Court Records Confidential was

neither made in good faith nor supported by a sound legal and factual basis. Defendant's Motion

asserted four interests that ostensibly would be protected by closure, but the motion cited no facts four interests that ostensibly would be protected by closure, but the motion cited no

in support of that assertion. At the hearing on the motion, Defendant made no ad of that assertion. At the hearing on the motion, Defendant made no ad

to demonstrate how and why the asserted interests would be served by closure. demonstrate how and why the asserted interests would be served COPY by closure.

Defendant's arguments addressed extraneous, inapplicable issues that arguments addressed extraneous, inapplicable issues that not support closure and not support closure

demonstrated the Defendant's lack of good faith in bringing his motion. In sum, the motion was the Defendant's lack of good faith in bringing his motion. In sum, the motion

wholly without merit, and the Post is entitled to an award without merit, and the Post is entitled to an award fees fees and costs in defending its and costs in defending

rights of access. of access.

CERIFIED

in connection with this matter and grant such other relief as the Court deems proper. the Court deems proper.

WHEREFORE, WHEREFORE, the Post respectfully requ the Post respectfully requ that that this Court award to it its fees and costs this Court award to it its fees and

with this matter and grant such other relief as

A
NOT

Respectfully submitted,
THOMAS, LOCICERO & BRALOW PL
<signature>
Deanna K. Shullman
Florida Bar No.: 0514462
James B. Lake
Florida Bar No.: 0023477
101 N.E. Third Avenue, Suite 1500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (813) 984-3060
Facsimile: (813) 984-3070
Attorneys for The Palm Beach Post

2

## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished via hand delivery to Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq., Atterbury Goldberger, et al., 250 S. Australian Ave., Ste. 1400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (fax: 561-835-8691 and via U.S, mail to Michael McAuliffe, Esq., and Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq., State Attorney's Office - West Palm Beach, 401 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (fax: 561-355-7351);); on th this 26 day of June, 2009.

Attorney: <signature>

NOT A CERTIFIED

3
documents/doj-9e553430cdcec2bd.pdf
{}