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

nths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis "Fein 1059 044.444vEleuf Skim 340, E0coRuT Good, Etas 33133 1

rt, f tomm 33113 Sol 316 EFTA00180359 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 fro

onths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. FM. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (FM. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis 'reins. 30$96amailonsuL Sum 340,CoColtui Gaon, Foram 33133 1 01

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

nths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis 'Fein PI. 3059 GuADAvinui. Surf 340,ECcONLIT Glow, Ft0INDA 3311

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

ths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. Sec Jane Doc III v. Epstein, Case No. 08 cv 80069 KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis "rein 30S9GKAKAAviAut,Suin 340,EocoorutSkOvr,FFOROA33133 1.151

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

onths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. Sec Jane Doe HI v. Epstein, Case No. 08 cv 80069 KAM (SD. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Ha. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis Teinn. 3059 Quo Avuin.San 345 Cattssa Gitovt, Fume. 33133 1 513