Epstein Secrets

Bradley James Edwards [email protected] Isidro Manuel Garcia [email protected] Jack Patrick Hill [email protected] Katherine Warthen Ezell [email protected] Michael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willits lawyerwilli

“a compelling need for the tax returns exists because the information contained therein is not otherwise available.” (Appeal, p. 24). However, in the Eleventh Circuit this heightened burden has been rejected. “[T]he Eleventh Circuit does not require a showing of compelling need before tax information may be obtai

Donuts, Inc. v. Mary’s Donuts, Inc., 2001 WL 34079319 (S.D. Fla. 2001), in which the Court applied the higher standard. These cases do not consider the Eleventh Circuit’s opinion in Maddow, and the federal judges in this District over the past five years since Pendlebury have consistently rejected the “compelling nee

e to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs Reponse In Opposition to Defendant Jay Epstein's Motion to Dismiss by Jane Doe No. 101. (Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/21/2009) 05/21/2009 98 2r .2 0 KB RESPONSE/REPLY to 89 Plaintiffs MOTION to Strike Z8 Reply to Response to Motion to

ant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint For Failure to State a Cause of Action and Motion for More Definite Statement by Jane Doe No. 101. (Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/21/2009) 05/27/2009 99 NOTICE by Jane Doe re (111 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Plaintiffs httns://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bi

0 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (a well-pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and unlikely"). In discussing Twombly, the Eleventh Circuit in Watts v. Fla. International Univ., 495 F.3d 1289, 1295 (111h Cir. 2007), noted - "The Supreme Court's most recent formulation of the pleading sp

FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 [email protected] kezell@p

ets to establish a fund with which to satisfy a potential judgment for money damages is not an appropriate exercise of a federal district court's 1 The Eleventh Circuit in Rosen "rejected appellees' suggestion that they successfully invoked the district court's equitable jurisdiction through their requests for any a

Critton, Esq. [email protected] Isidro Manual Garcia [email protected] Jack Patrick Hill [email protected] Katherine Warthen Ezell KEzell@podhurst.com Michael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willits lawyerswillits@aol

nown as and Located at 6469 Polo Pointe Way, Delray Beach, Fla., 444 F.Supp.2d 1258, 1263 -1264 (S.D.Fla. 2006). This Court should likewise follow the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling in Maddow and treat the tax return information as discoverable under ordinary standards. See also Shearson Lehman Hutton v. Lambros, 135 F.

.net Jack Patrick Hill [email protected] Katherine Warthen Ezell [email protected] Michael James Pike MPi

rwise available.” (Appeal, p. 24). However, in the Eleventh Circuit this heightened burden has been rejected. “[T]he

[email protected] Robert D. Critton, Esq. [email protected] Isidro Manual Garcia isid [email protected] Jack Patrick Hill [email protected] Katherine Warthen Ezell [email protected] Michael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willits [email protected] R

(11th Cir. 1996), the district court drew an adverse inference when claimants to real property refused to answer questions regarding the property. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed that decision, explaining that "[t]his Court has held ... that the trier of fact may take an adverse inference against parties to a civil

. JOSEFSBERG, ESQ. 2 Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg 25 West Flagler Street 3 Miami, FL 33130 For Jane Doe 101 305.358.2800 4 (Via telephone) 5 KATHERINE W. EZELL, ESQ. Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg 6 25 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33130 7 For Jane Doe 101 305.358.2800 8 FOR THE DEFENDANT: ROBERT D. CRI

ur Office prevails on that Issue, the victims would obviously have no claim under the CVRA. The victims would then pursue their appellate rights in the Eleventh Circuit. If, however, the victims prevail on that issue, then your Office would take "no position" on the remedy sought by the victims for the violation of

of 21 V. Consol Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 102 Como] Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 101 Consolrlabitiff Jane Doe 11 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Katherine Warthen Ezell Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg et al City National Bank Building 25 W Flagler Street Suite 800 Miami , FL 33130-1780 ax: Emai LEAD ATTORNEY TO B

". Defendant has not to date filed a "responsive pleading" in this case within the meaning of Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(a). It is established in the courts of the Eleventh Circuit that a motion to dismiss is not a "responsive pleading" and does not affect a plaintiff's right to amend the pleading once as a matter of course. Wi

ll issues triable as of right by a jury. Date: ‘44..Art.AA-r-12)-3 , 2010. Respectfully Submitted, By: R-W- C. e-pecli lay Robert r Jose e g Katherine W. Ezell Attorneys or Plaintiff Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 17 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800„ Miami, FL 33130, Miami 31:6393.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lau

009 WL 2567831, fn. I (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2009). U.S.' Zane, 2009 WL 2567832, fn.l (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18 2009). As to the meaning of "actual damages," the Eleventh Circuit in McMillian i t F.D.I.C., 81 F.3d 1041, 1055 (I I th Cir.1996)3, succinctly explained: 3 In McMillian the I 1th Circuit was faced with the task of