Epstein Secrets

, “have carved out a limited number of exceptions to the general requirement of disclosure, which permit plaintiffs to proceed anonymously.” Roe v. Aware Woman Ctr. for Choice, Inc., 253 F.3d 678, 685 (11th Cir. 2001) (internal citation omitted). “The 4 Althoug

DOE, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ____________________________________/ JANE DOE NO. II, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469- MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ___________________________________

ments necessary to sustain a recovery under some viable legal theory." Snow v. DirectTV, Inc., 450 F.3d 1314, 1320 (11th Cir. 2006) (quoting Roe v. Aware Woman Ctr. For Choice, Inc., 253 F.3d 678, 684 (11th Cir. 2001)). Moreover, a court should dismiss a complaint "when, on the basis of a dispositive issue of l

ein for "sexual assault" based on a "violation of Chapter 800 of the Florida Statutes"2 for the "lewd and lascivious acts committed by Epstein upon Jane Doe." (Compl. ,r 18.) Plaintiff cannot assert a cause of action for "violation of Chapter 800, Florida Statutes" because there is no private right of a

This is a liberal pleading requirement, one that does not require a plaintiff to plead with particularity every element of a cause of action. Roe v. Aware Woman Ctr. for Choice, Inc., 253 F.3d 678, 683 (11th Cir. 2001). Instead, the complaint need only “contain either direct or inferential allegations respecting

t”)’s Motion to Dismiss and Motion for More Definite Statement, Directed to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (DE 46), filed October 6, 2008. Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 (“Plaintiff”) filed a response to the motion (DE 49) and Defendant filed a Reply (DE 50). The Court has carefully reviewed the motion, respons