Epstein Secrets

Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Brad Edwards, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler Mermelstein &

ssue.) See also, 8 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. §2037, Wright and Miller(“A witness Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM D

rved this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this 6th day of October, 2008: Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877

Entered on FLSD Docket 10/06/2008 Page 4 of 10 Case No. CV-80119-Marra-Johnson Page No. 4 Procedure § 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d ed.2004} (hereinafter Wright & Miller} ("[T]he pleading must contain something more ... than ... a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable

ied by CM/ECF on this 14!h day of October, 2008: Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Merme

ure § 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d ed.2004) (hereinafter Wright & Miller) ("[T]he pleading must contain somethin

RANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE APPEARANCES: 13 FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: 14 15 16 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 305.931.2200 For Jane Doe BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. 17 Rothstein Rosenfe

stitutionality or even impropriety. Incendy at 956 (citing United States' Kordel, 397 U.S. I, 11 (1970)). See also Securities and Exchange Comm'nl. Wright, 261 Fed. Appx. 259, 263 (11th Cir. 2008) ("[N]o 'special circumstances' existed in this case warranting a stay, as there is no record evidence sug

1 TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA, 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE APPEARANCES: 13 14 FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQ. Mermelstein & Horowitz 15 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33160 16 For Jane Doe 17 BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Ad

laim against Robson must fail. As a general rule, "[a]n actionable conspiracy [under Florida law] requires an actionable underlying tort or wrong." Wright v. Yurko, 446 So. 2d 1162, 1165 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).1° 10 This case is governed by the general rule. Cf. Churr