Epstein Secrets

al Rule of Civil Procedure 7.3 does not require an unequivocal finding of manifest injustice before the Court may alter or amend a prior order. See Bostic v. AT&T of the Virgin Islands, 45 V.I. 553, 312 F.Supp.2d 731 M. 2004). "...[R]econsideration is the appropriate means of bringing to the court's

ion for reconsideration of this Court's Order entered on May 24, 2011 requiring Plaintiffs to file a Second Amended Complaint adding J. P. Molyneux Studio, Ltd. as a party on the grounds that such a forced joinder will create manifest injustice. For the reasons set forth below, the Plaintiffs' motion for rec

al Rule of Civil Procedure 7.3 does not require an unequivocal finding of manifest injustice before the Court may alter or amend a prior order. See Bostic v. AT&T of the Virgin Islands, 45 V.I. 553, 312 F.Supp.2d 731 (D.C.V.I. 2004). "...[Rleconsideration is the appropriate means of bringing to the co

12 EFTA00307589 Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration Epstein et al vs. Fancelli Paneling, Inc. Case No. ST-IO-CV-443 Studio, Ltd. and Juan Pablo Molyneux v. Jeffrey Epstein and L.S.J, LLC filed in the District Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Thomas and St. John as

he just relief for all existing parties. A motion for reconsideration is not for raising matters that could have been raised before, but were not. Bostic v. AT&T of the Virgin Islands, 45 V.I. 553, 312 F. Stepp. 2d 731, 733 (D.V.L 2004). 13 EFTA00308336 V. CONCLUSION Manifest injustice will resul

action formerly pending in the District Court of the Virgin Islands, bearing the Case No. 3:10-cv-00034, captioned 4 EFTA00308327 J.P.Molyneux Studio, Ltd. and Juan Pablo Molyneux against Jeffrey Epstein and L.S.J. LLC. (the "Molyneux Action'), in which Molyncux alleges: [s]ubsequent to the execution o