Epstein Secrets

r the plain- tiffs to amend their pleadings. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In their amended complaint, Jeffrey E. Epstein ("Epsteinn and Financial Trust Company, Inc. ("Fr) (collectively "plain- tiffs") allege that Citibank, N.A. ("Citi- bank") and Citigroup, Inc. ("Citigroup"I [collectively "defendants"] misrepre

itch book" referenced in the amended complaint is the document that plaintiffs rely on is a disputed fact that precludes a Rule 12(bX6) dismissal. Financial Trust Co., 268 F.Supp.2d at 572. Nothing in any of the briefs have convinced me that the parties do not dispute which pitch book Epstein received, what disc

ed to meet Federal Rule of Civil Proce- dure 9(b)'s heightened pleading standard. I did, however, grant the plaintiffs leave to amend the complaint Financial Trust Co.' Citibank, 268 F.Supp.2d 661 (D.Vir- gin Islands 2003). H. LEGAL ANALYSIS A. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) (1-31 In order to state a viable

F.34 at 1422). In Count I, plaintiffs allege that the defendants' conduct "constituted the mak- ing of fraudulent misrepresentations ... regarding the AIG Investment" that the defendants knew were materially mislead- ing "because of their failure to state or disclose the additional or qualifying infor- mation re

On November 27, 2002, I issued an order restraining Citibank and Citigroup from pursuing their New York lawsuit pending decisions on these motions. Financial Trust Co., Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., Order, Civ. No. 2002-108 (D.V.I. Nov. 27, 2002). In light of subsequent events, however, I sua sponte vacated this prohibition.

73, 879-80 (3d Cir. 1995). Considering the totality of the circumstances surrounding this case, I make the following findings. First, Epstein and Financial Trust have selected this forum, and they are residents of the Virgin Islands with strong ties to this community. Epstein owns a seventy-acre island, and

he Amended 1999 Note. (Id. Ex. A at 8-9; Ex. B at 7-8; Ex. D at 10; Ex. E at 2-3.) Sometime in the spring of 2001, Epstein and FTC discovered that the AIG Investment was "suddenly and rapidly deteriorating." (Pls.' Mem. Of Law in Opp'n to Mot. To Dismiss, Epstein Decl. 1 20.) According to the plaintiffs, FTC's a

damages. Plaintiffs have thus alleged enough information to survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion on Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-000727 EFTA00228107 k Financial Trust Co. v. Citibank Civil No. 02-108 Memorandum Opinion Page 9 their fraud claims. C. The Mass .Mutual Investment Claims Although it is unclear from t

erentiate the counts between the Mass Mutual and AIG funds as defendant attempts to do. Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-000729 EFTA00228109 I .• Financial Trust Co. Inc. I. Citibank Civ. No. 2002-108 Memorandum Opinion Page 11 ENTERED this 30th day of December, 2004. FOR THE COURT: /s/ Thomas K. Moore Distri

) In follow-up telephone conversations during that same two week period, Davison and her associates made additional specific representations about the AIG Investment, without disclosing Citibank and AIG's relationship. Davison also during that period represented that Citibank had "done their due diligence" and

iled to meet Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)'s heightened pleading standard. I did, however, grant the plaintiffs leave to amend the complaint. Financial Trust Co. v. Citibank, 268 F. Supp.2d 561 (D.V.I. 2003). For internal use only SDNY_GM_00064428 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R.CON(F IDENTIAL DB-SDNY-00

follow-up telephone conversations during that same two week period, Davison and her associates r 5] made additional specific representations about the AIG Investment, without disclosing Citibank and AIG's relationship. Davison also during that period represented that Citibank had "done their due diligence" and w

On November 27, 2002, I issued an order restraining Citibank and Citigroup from pursuing their New York lawsuit pending decisions on these motions. Financial Trust Co.. Inc. v. Citibank, N.A.. Order, Civ. No.2002-108 (D.V.I. Nov. 27, 2002). In light of subsequent events, however, I sua sponte vacated this prohibition. Fi

the Amended 1999 Note. (Id. Ex. A at 8-9: Ex. B at 7-8: Ex. D at 10; Ex. Eat 2-3.) Sometime in the spring of 2001, Epstein and FTC discovered that the AIG Investment was "suddenly and rapidly deteriorating." (Pls.' Mem. Of Law in Opp'n to Mot. To Dismiss, Epstein Decl. ¶ 20.) According to the plaintiffs, FTC's a