Epstein Secrets

O04-KAM Document _ Entered FLSD Docket 10/03/.. J8 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA NO. 08-80804-OV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE NO. 1, Plaintiff, 1. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, , and Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER REMANDING CASE TO STATE COURT THIS CAUSE

fraudulent, Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Remand [DE 11] is GRANTED. 2. This case shall be REMANDED to the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, case No. 50 2008 CA 006596, for lack of subject matte

Goldberg, Kohn, Bell, Black, Rosenbloom & Moritz, Ltd, Chicago, Illi- nois, for Appellant. Chad McGowan, S. Randall Hood, McGowan, Hood, Felder & Johnson, Rock Hill, South Carolina; Randall M. Eason, Bagnell & Eason, L.L.C., Lancaster, South Carolina, for Ap- pellees. Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and

y are more ap- propriately ft to state factfinders and be- cause the involve hypothetical circum- stances.. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED. LYNNE, District Judge, dissenting: In my opinion the discussion and affirm- ance of the district court's denial of an injunction are inappropriat

hort period in prison for punishment or other purposes but still needs supervision and trainin programs after release.")); see also United States Johnson. 529 U.S. 53. 59 (2000) ("The objectives of supervised release would be unfulfilled if excess prison time were to offset and reduce terms of super

. We hold only that a sentence of probation, without a single day in jail or any period of supervised release is an unreasonable one. VACATED and REMANDED. C.A.11,2008. U.S. I. Pugh F.3d --, 2008 WL 253040 (C.A.11 (Ala.)) 2008 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. EFTA00192140 Page I

JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 5, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRALJOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-8038I-MARRA/JOHNSON EFTA00182748 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

nt. We express no opinion as to the ad- missibility of any statements made by Wood either before or after the breach of the contract. REVERSED and REMANDED. C.A.I I (Fla.),1986. U.S. v. Wood 780 F.2d 929 O 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. Page 4 haps://web2.westlaw.com/pr