Epstein Secrets

e shoehorn her claim within section (2). Instead, she can rely on (3), which is “a ‘catch-all’ phrase that allows courts to award “other relief.” Freeman v. First Union Nat. Bank, 865 So.2d 1272, 1276 (Fla. 2004). The intent of this provision was “to facilitate the use of the other remedies provided i

ive, and opportunity to fraudulently transfer assets.” Jane Doe’s Motion to Restrain Fraudulent Transfer of Assets at 11 (quoting United States v. Sparks, 265 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2001)).2 Epstein completely misses the point of Jane Doe’s means, motive, and opportunity argument, construing it as s

legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured."); Fla. Stat. Ann. § (defining creditor protected by the act as "a person who has a claim"). See generally Freeman v. First Union Nat. Bank, 865 So.2d 1272, 1277 (Fla. 2004) (noting that the definition of 13 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 165 Entered on

a "perfect circumstantial evidence case that [Epstein] ha[s] means, motive, and opportunity" to fraudulently transfer assets. See United States v. Sparks, 265 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2001) (finding probable cause for an arrest based solely on a showing of means, motive, and opportunity). The fact tha

legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured."); Fla. Stat. Ann. § (defining creditor protected by the act as "a person who has a claim"). See generally Freeman v. First Union Nat. Bank, 865 So.2d 1272, 1277 (Fla. 2004) (noting that the definition of 13 EFTA00234883 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 165

a "perfect circumstantial evidence case that [Epstein] ha[s] means, motive, and opportunity" to fraudulently transfer assets. See United States v. Sparks, 265 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2001) (finding probable cause for an arrest based solely on a showing of means, motive, and opportunity). The fact tha