Epstein Secrets

presented Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2. (Id.) This placed both petitioners on notice that Epstein would be pleading guilty on June 30, 2008, in Palm Beach Circuit Court. Petitioners' arguments and the record in this case simply do not establish that there was any violation of the petitioners' right to confer. See a

ity and/or detrimental reliance are often present in judicial estoppel cases, they are not required.'" Burnes 291 F.3d at 1286 (citations omitted); Ryan Operations G.P. v. Santiam-Midwest Lumber Co., 81 27 EFTA00799851 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 408 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/06/2017 Page 28 of 32 There is a

epresented Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2. (ti) This placed both petitioners on notice that Epstein would be pleading guilty on June 30, 2008, in Palm Beach Circuit Court. Petitioners' arguments and the record in this case simply do not establish that there was any violation of the petitioners' right to confer. See a

vity and/or detrimental reliance are often present in judicial estoppel cases, they are not required." Burnes 291 F.3d at 1286 (citations omitted); Ryan Operations G.P. v. Santiam-Midwest Lumber Co., 81 27 EFTA00591488 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 401-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 29 of 33 There i

wo Petitioners, represented by the same counsel as in the instant case, filed civil complaints for damages against Mr. Epstein in federal court and Palm Beach Circuit Court. See Doe v. Epstein, 13 EFTA00299033 Case No. 08-80893-Civ-KAM (S.D.Fla.) (DE 1); L.M. v. Epstein, Case No. 09-81092-Civ- KAM (S.D.Fla.) (DE 1);

tage by litigation on one theory, and then seek an inconsistent advantage by pursuing an incompatible theory." Slater, 871 F.3d at 1180-81, quoting Ryan Operations G.P. v. Santiam-Midwest Lumber Co., 81 F.3d 355, 358 (3d Cir. 1996). The Eleventh Circuit "employs a two-part test to guide district courts in applying