Epstein Secrets

vt, kouo• 33133 5 of 316 EFTA00234229 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 7 of 100 To cement this point, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has said that "[w]hen [a] complaint does not claim a specific amount of damages, removal from state court is proper if it is facially apparent from

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a

GEM% FM1:433133 I of 311 EFTA00180412 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 7 of 100 To cement this point, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has said that "Ewlhen [a] complaint does not claim a specific amount of damages, removal from state court is proper if it is facially apparent from

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a

Gam, rims33133 9 a/ 31$ EFTA00231018 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 7 of 100 To cement this point, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has said that "[wjhen [a] complaint does not claim a specific amount of damages, removal from state court is proper if it is facially apparent from

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a

iovt. NOM* 33133 Go1316 EFTA00232138 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KANI Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 7 of 100 To cement this point, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has said that "[w]hen [a] complaint does not claim a specific amount of damages, removal from state court is proper if it is facially apparent from

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a