Epstein Secrets

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 38 A. Yes. Q. Was that the truth? A. No. Q. In fact, you went to Royal Palm, right? A. Yes. Q. So you lied to Mr. Epstein again, correct? A. Yes. Q. Is Wellington the college that you told Jeff's assistant that you w

ether conduct is outrageous enough to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress is a question of law, not a question of fact. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Steadman, 968 So. 2d 592, 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (citations omitted). In this case, without reaching the question of "outrage," the pl

f 100 41 nsor & Associates Repanang and Transcdpdan, lac Page 38 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Was that the truth? 3 A. No. 4 Q. In fact, you went to Royal Palm, right? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. So you lied to Mr. Epstein again, correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Is Wellington the college that you told 9 Jeff's assis

ether conduct is outrageous enough to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress is a question of law, not a question of fact. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Steadman, 968 So. 2d 592, 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (citations omitted). In this case, without reaching the question of "outrage," the pl

100 ior nsor & Associates kg:Toning add Tansciirinn, Inc Page 38 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Was that the truth? 3 A. No. 4 Q. In fact, you went to Royal Palm, right? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. So you lied to Mr. Epstein again, correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Is Wellington the college that you told 9 Jeff's assis

ether conduct is outrageous enough to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress is a question of law, not a question of fact. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Steadman, 968 So. 2d 592, 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (citations omitted). In this case, without reaching the question of "outrage," the pl