Epstein Secrets

with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446, and 1332(a)(1), the defendants, Jeffrey Epstein, hereby remove this action' from Palm Beach County Circuit Court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and respectfully state as follows: Introduction Six months ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Flietit0A ()MO D.C. ELECT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80804-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, HALEY ROBSON,

ourt where one has that right, and should be equally vigilant to protect the right to proceed in the Federal court.'" Lea, 428 F.3d at 1325 (citing Wecker v. Nat'l Enameling & Stamping Co., 204 U.S. 176, 186 (1907)). See also id. (observing that "Congress `did not extend [to defendants a right of removal] with one hand, and with the o

8 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446, and 1332(a)(1), the defendants, Jeffrey Epstein, and , hereby remove this action' from Palm Beach County Circuit Court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and respectfully state as follows: Introduction Six months ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical

urt where one has that right, and should be equally vigilant to protect the right to proceed in the Federal court."' Legg, 428 F.3d at 1325 (citing Wecker v. Nat'l Enameling & Stamping Co., 204 U.S. 176, 186 (1907)). See also id. (observing that "Congress `did not extend [to defendants a right of removal] with one hand, and with the o

h 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446, and 1332(e), the defendants, Jeffrey Epstein, , and hereby remove this action' from Palm Beach County Circuit Court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and respectfully state as follows: Introduction Six months ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical

urt where one has that right, and should be equally vigilant to protect the right to proceed in the Federal court.'" Legg, 428 F.3d at 1325 (citing Wecker v. Nat'l Enameling & Stamping Co., 204 U.S. 176, 186 (1907)). See also id. (observing that "Congress 'did not extend [to defendants a right of removal] with one hand, and with the o