Epstein Secrets

is ca- pacity as District Attorney for San Francisco County, et aL, Defendants- Appellees. Nos. 82-4427, 83-2581. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 12, 1984. Decided Sept. 3, 1986. Citizen and organizations promoting voting rights of Americans with ethnic backgrou

ose J. OLAGUES, on Behalf of himself and all others similarly situated; His- panic Coalition for Human Rights, Chi- nese for Affirmative Action, and San Francisco Lation Voter Registration Education Project, Plaintiffs-Appel- lants. Joseph P. RUSSONIELLO, individually and in his capacity es Untied States At

dge: Olagues, a citizen, and certain organiza- tions promoting the voting rights of Ameri- cans with Hispanic or Chinese ethnic back- grounds in the San Francisco Bay area (the organizations) sued for damages and de- claratory and injunctive relief arising from a preliminary investigation by the United States At

ward Raymond EGE, Joseph Boyd and Joseph Victor luio, Appellants, UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 14955. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit April 1, 1957. Rehearing Denied May 15, 1957. One defendant was convicted of transporting woman front California to Arizona for purposes of pros

one girl le not shown. But On- 112 881 6. The quick appearance thereafter of Cindy at Scottsdale along with Judy straight from Ege's quarters in San Francisco' 7. Evidence that Boyd did make many calls to San Francisco from his motel late in September, 1953, and in October. 8. Boyd's subsequent admissi

Robert W. Ware, United States Marshal for the Southern District of California, Appel. ken. Mime. Nos. 895, 596. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Nov. 5, 1958. Accused, who had been indicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan for alleged- t mailing cir

istrict of California, according to the direction thereon." The exhibited letter plainly threatens injury to the addressee Joe Cohen, Elks Club, San Francisco, California, and evinces the manifest intent to extort mono' from the addressee. The order of the district court denying the motion of appellant

es. *3 While plaintiffs do not cite any case in which a court has held that the doctrine does not apply, the Court's own research reveals that the Ninth Circuit has held that the doctrine of forum non conveniens is inapplicable to Jones Act and FELA cases j because each Act contains a mandato venue provi

the most part, will not speak English. Independent medical exams will have to be conducted in Mexico. Every trial witness will have to be flown to San Francisco from Mexico, assuming the United States government will even allow such witnesses into the United States. The Court is faced with the specter of m