Epstein Secrets

red on FLSD Docket 10/31/2008 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARFtA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant.

ule 12(b)(6) in the typical case. See, e.g., CBT Flint Partners. LLC I. Goodmail Systems, Inc., 529 F.Supp. 2d 1376, 1379 (ND. Ga. 2007); Coughlin'. Wal-Mart Stores East 12 2008 WL 2704381 (M.D. Fla. 2008); Capaz I. Whitaker, Weinstraub & Grizzard, M.D.S. P.A., 2007 WI, 1655473 (M.D. Fla. 2007). In CBT Flint Pa

ication on appeal." Sou v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 1, 6 n.11 (1st Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted here and throughout); accord Johnson v. United States, 734 F.3d 352, 360 (4th Cir. 2013). For internal use only SDNY_GM_00056843 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R.ctON(F IDENTIAL DB

. Dec. (CCH) P45,306 The district court has revisited certification and decertified the promotions class in light of the Supreme Court's opinion in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, U.S. , 131 S. Ct. 2541, 180 L. Ed. 2d 374 (2011).' We thus again confront the question of whether the workers' have presented a c

per acts by BoA. To the extent Mr. Steadman's claims are predicated on such acts, rather than on Green Tree's acts, they are not viable. 2 See also Johnson v. Fed Home Loan Mort. Corp.. No. C12-1712 TSZ. 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10485. 2013 WL 308957. at '4 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 25. 2013) ("IAN assignee is liab

12(b)(6) only test the validity of ["42] a claim, not its redundancy; a redundant claim should not be dismissed as long as it is valid." tMchael v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, No. 6:14-cv-579-Orl-40DAB, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153908, 2014 WL 5502442, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 30, 2014) (citing Bangkok Crafts Corp. v.

r a legally sufficient privilege log under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280 (b)(5), as interpreted by the Fourth District Court of Appeal in TIG Ins. Corp. v. Johnson, 799 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Edwards' privilege log is insufficient on its face in many respects. In addition, although the Special Master

nt that these items were prepared in anticipation of litigation and are protected from disclosure without presenting evidence to support the claim." Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Weeks, 696 So. 2d 855, 856-57 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Once the party seeking the documents challenges non-production, the burden shifts to the