Epstein Secrets

9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Dock'e(03/12/2009 Page 4 of 21 C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. Page 4 factual allegations"); Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (a well-pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote an

mplaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Rule 12(b)(6) does not countenance ... dismissals based on a judge's disb

d 338 (1989} (" Rule 12(b}(6} does not countenance . . . dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual allegations"}; Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974} (a well-pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote an

mplaint are true (even if doubtful in fact}, see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002}; Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989} (" Rule 12(b}(6} does not countenance . . . dismissals based on a judge's di

a complaint's factual allegations"); Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90

508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827,

.2d 338 (1989) ( Rule 12(b)(6) does not I countenance ... dismissals b sed on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual allegations"); Scheuer . Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (a we -pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and

re true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz ii. Soremail. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002 ; Neitzke . Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) ( Rule 12(b)(6) does not I countenance ... dismissals b sed on a judge's disbe