Epstein Secrets

of the sale he made on the strength of it. the party recommending must make good the loss. . . ." Id. (quoting Einstein. Hirsch & Co. v. Marshal) 8 Conley. 58 Ala. 153 (1877)). Here, the Plaintiff alleges that BIC was in a position of superior knowledge regarding Specialty's business operations and th

ditors. (c) Fraud in insolvency is a Class B misdemeanor. Ala. Code § 13A-9-48 (1975). The language of the statute provides no indication that the Legislature intended to create a private right of action, or otherwise [" 59] impose civil liability, id., and the Plaintiff has made no showing regarding the L

n to dismiss, (pp. 16 - 17), the standard as detailed in Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twomblv, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), Is now the applicable standard, not Conley. Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations, the basis for relief in the complaint must state "more than labels and concl

rom passing another type of retroactive legislation, laws "impairing the Obligation of Contracts! The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause prevents the Legislature (and other government actors) from depriving private persons of vested property rights except for a "public use" and upon payment of lust compensat

ars beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Id, (abrogating and quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). The Supreme Court rejected the notion that "a wholly conclusory statement of

FLSD Docket 05/08/2009 Page 3 of 25 v. Epstein, et al. 113 These provisions demonstrate that retroactive statutes raise particular concerns. The Legislature's unmatched powers allow it to sweep away settled expectations suddenly and without individualized consideration. Its responsivity to political pre