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

asis added). Plainly, this case involves the general rule, not the narrow exception, because only one person could have caused Jane Doe's injuries. CI Martin v. Marlin, 529 So. 2d 1174, 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (upholding 13 Lewis Tann. 3059 Gomainwtkvi, Sun 340, (WONT G.ovejtam 33133 13 Of S16 EFTA00234236 Ca

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

phasis added). Plainly, th;s Cat ;nvulvcs dic genera-rule, not the narrow exception, because only one person could have caused Jane Doe's injuries. CI Martin v. Marlin, 529 So. 2d 1174, 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (upholding 13 LeNviA:Ein n. 309 Gram Avow'. Sun( 340,Cocoito Gnm. ha/a:433133 13 1315 EFTA00231025 C

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

affis-added). Plainlyithis-ctbe involvcb die geucral rule, not the narrow exception, because only one person could have caused Jane Doe's injuries. CI Martin v. Marlin, 529 So. 2d 1174, 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (upholding 13 Lewis 30$9GweAvoug, Sun( 340.03conta Griot CiaiuoA 33133 11.1311 EFTA00232145 Case 9:0