Epstein Secrets

attempted to put his hands down plaintiff's dress, and that there was an actual and intentional touching, sufficient to state a claim for battery); Hogan'. Tavzel, 660 So.2d 350 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (tortfeasor may be liable for battery for infecting another with a sexually transmitted disease). Defe

t Partners, the Court warned against reading the decision in Trombly too broadly: 4 EFTA00221182 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/3112008 Page 5 of 11 In my view, Trombly did not radically alter the elementary rules of civil procedure that have governed litigation in the f

attempted to put his hands down plaintiff's dress, and that there was an actual and intentional touching, sufficient to state a claim for battery); Hogan'. Tavzel, 660 So.2d 350 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (tortfeasor may be liable for battery for infecting another with a sexually transmitted disease); see a

cuments conventionally in any other division of the Southern District of Florida. 1 EFTA00222689 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 07'162008 Page 2 of 3 a presumption in favor of openness of court records, which "must be balanced against any competing interest advanced." Unite

nt asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi I Bankers Ins. Company 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 41h DCA 1983); Malloy I Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth

leged conclusory allegations simply attempting to track parts of the statutory language EFTA00175738 Case 9:08-cv-k ,2-KAM Document 41 Entere' FLSD Docket 10/C )8 Page 8 of 10 Case No. CV-80232-Marra-Johnson Page No. 8 in the statute without underlying factual allegations pertaining to the Plaintif

asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth

ECORD DATE March 19, 2009 FOR 0 rt E USX ONLY AMOUNT lifil6RECEIPT a 7.17(51G9te EFTA00175267 Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2009 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 09-CIV- 80469 - MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE II, Plaintif

States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth A

OetA) rfuCate rmr9 e. or- r:le, [Nader ,E35 IvA.5 N155; in Awl° Co r r Ire° , Pile-s. EFTA00175428 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/20/2009 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE No. 101, Plaintiff, VS. JEFFREY EPST

asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-Incrimination. See DeLisi I Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 41b DCA 1983)• Malloy I Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth

lorida Jack Alan Goldber cr Esq. Robert D. Critton. Esq. Is/ Adam D. Horowitz - 8 - EFTA00175625 Case 9:08-cv 119-KAM Document 69 Enter in FLSD Docket D2/2009 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2 I JEFFREY EP