← EFTA02740363Court RecordsEFTA02740377 →

EFTA02740374

Court Records

Extracted Text #

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2008 Page 1 of 3 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA-
JANE DOE NO. 4, 
Plaintiff, 
vs. 
JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 
Defendant. 
 / 
DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION 
TO MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT (DE #9) 
In accordance with Local Rule 7.1(C), Defendant Jeffrey Epstein submits the 
following response in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion (DE #9) for Judgment Upon 
Default, and respectfully states as follows: 
1. Jeffrey Epstein has filed a motion (DE #11) to set aside the clerk's default 
(DE #8) that would serve as the basis of a default judgment (DE #9-2). 
2. For the reasons detailed in that motion (DE #11 at 3), the clerk's default 
was entered prematurely because substituted service was effected on June 2, not May 7. 
Thus, in accordance with Rule 12(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 
Mr. Epstein has until June 23 to respond to the complaint. 
3. Apart from the prematureness of the plaintiff's motion, "[t]he law does not 
favor defaults, and any doubts as to whether a party is in default should be decided in 
EFTA02740374

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2008 Page 2 of 3 
favor of the defaulting party." E.g., Marschauser v. Travelers Indem. Co., 145 F.R.D. 
605, 610 (S.D. Ha. 1992) (Highsmith, J.) (citing 10 Charles A. =, Arthur R. 
& Mary K. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2681 at 402-03 (2d ed. 1983)). Cf. 
id. (noting that "[t]he Court's entry of an Order of Default is within the discretion of the 
Court"). 
4. Because the default (DE 8) was premature, any default judgment at this 
point would also be premature. See Franklin v. Scribner, No. 07cv438 BTM (LSP), 2007 
WL 2326085, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2007) (denying motion for default judgment where 
the answer deadline had not yet passed); see also id. (characterizing the motion for 
default judgment as "deficien[t]"). 
WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, defendant Jeffrey Epstein opposes the 
plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment. 
Respectfully submitted, 
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & 
WEISS, P.A. 
250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 
Tel: [Phone Redacted] 
Fax: [Phone Redacted] 
By: AI Jack A. Goldberger 
Jack A. Goldberger 
Ha. Bar No. 262013 
jgoldberger@ agwpa.com 
Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein 
EFTA02740375

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2008 Page 3 of 3 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 19, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing 
document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing 
document is being served this day on counsel of record identified below by facsimile and 
U.S. Mail. 
Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. 
Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 
Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. 
Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 
18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 
Miami, Florida 33160 
Fax: [Phone Redacted] 
/s/ Jack A. Goldberger 
Jack A. Goldberger 
EFTA02740376
← EFTA02740363Court RecordsEFTA02740377 →