Epstein Secrets

ed by Iran, is involved, the Government should have as much discretion as possible. Noting that federal landlord-tenant law does not exist, Judge Posner stated in Pow- The Federal Courts could of course create that law, picking and choosing among ex- isting state laws and proposed reforms in accorda

pt the relevant rule of New York landlord-tenant law for purposes of deciding the remaining issue in this dis- pute, and hold that, consistent with New York law, OFM was entitled to arbitrarily withhold its consent to Epstein's request to sublet the Premises to Fisher. Even assum- ing OFM had a hidden a

d in part and denied in part. I. Federal Courts .3=409 In diversity action, federal court sitting in New York must apply New York law, including New York's choice-of-law rules. 2. Contracts e=s144 Under New York's choice-of-law rules, when court is construing meaning of con- tract, court should apply

t may not be introduced to create ambiguity. Arthur M. Handler, Whitman & Ransom, New York City, for plaintiff. Elliot Silverman, Cold & Wachtel, New York City, for defendant. ORDER CONBOY, District Judge: We have before us an action for breach of contract. Plaintiff Michael R. Stroll ("Stroll") see

wned by Iran, is involved, the Government should have as much discretion as possible. Noting that federal landlord-tenant law does not exist, Judge Posner stated in Powers: The Federal Courts could of course create that law, picking and choosing among existing state laws and proposed reforms in accord

York, Pro Se. Jessie Siegel a/k/a Jesse Siegel, Esq., New York, Pro Se. Siegel, Martin & Heilbrun, By Robert Heilbrun, Esq., A Partner of the Firm, New York, Pro Se. Ron Soffer, Esq., New York, Pro Se. Carmen Tausik, Esq., New York, Pro Se. OPINION CHIN, D.J. *1 In this case, the United States (the "

on may be ordered detained.... 18 U.S.C. § 3148 (repealed). As the Sev- Ic th Circuit stated recently in United States Molt, 758 F.2d 1198 (1985) (Posner, J.): T]he change in the standard for bail pending appeal is not an ex post facto law. Even though it may work to the disadvant- age p f of a de

8 U.S.C. § 2423(b). Jane Does #1 through #19 were all minors at the time of their involvement with defendant Epstein. Jane Doe #11 was a resident of New York; the remaining Jane Does were all residents of Palm Beach County, Florida, at the time of their involvement with defendant Epstein. Count 1 carries