Epstein Secrets

ion Fidelity Life Ins., 439 So.2d 904 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) 7. Bond v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc., 246 So.2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971 8. Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc. 353 So.2d 547 (Fla. 1977). 9. Snipes v. West Flaciler Kennel Club, 105 So.2d 164 (Fla. 1958) EFTA00722695 v. Epstein Page 2 10. Buchana

224 (3d Cir. 2007). 8. Petrol LTD v. Radulovic, 764 So.2d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). DIRECT INJURIES MUST BE SUSTAINED TO PROPERLY ALLEGE RICO 1. O'Malley v. St. Thomas Univ., Inc. 599 So.2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d (DCA 1992). 2. Palmus Y Bambu, S.A. v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, 881 So.2d 565 (Fl

ion Fidelity Life Ins., 439 So.2d 904 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) 7. Bond v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc., 246 So.2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971 8. Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc. 353 So.2d 547 (Fla. 1977). 9. Snipes v. West Flaciler Kennel Club, 105 So.2d 164 (Fla. 1958) EFTA00614425 • v. Epstein Page 2 10. Buch

224 (3d Cir. 2007). 8. Petrol LTD v. Radulovic, 764 So.2d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). DIRECT INJURIES MUST BE SUSTAINED TO PROPERLY ALLEGE RICO 1. O'Malley v. St. Thomas Univ., Inc. 599 So.2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d (DCA 1992). 2. Palmus Y Bambu, S.A. v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, 881 So.2d 565 (Fl

ko, 446 So. 2d 1162, 1165 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).1° 10 This case is governed by the general rule. Cf. Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 353 So. 2d 547,550 (Fla. 1977) (noting that while there is "ordinarily . . . no independent tort for conspiracy," there is a narrow exceptio

indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained not as a direct result of predicate acts . . . will not allow recovery under Florida RICO."' (quoting O'Malley v. St. Thomas Univ., Inc., 599 So. 2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992))) (emphasis added). Because the Amended Complaint does not satisfy the direct-in

ko, 446 So. 2d 1162, 1165 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).1° 10 This case is governed by the general rule. Cf. Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 353 So. 2d 547, 550 (Fla. 1977) (noting that while there is "ordinarily . . . no independent tort for conspiracy," there is a narrow excepti

'indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained not as a direct result of predicate acts . . . will not allow recovery under Florida RICO." (quoting O'Malley v. St. Thomas Univ., Inc., 599 So. 2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992))) (emphasis added). Because the Amended Complaint does not satisfy the direct-in

o, 446 So. 2d 1162, 1165 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).1° 10 This case is governed by the general rule. CJ: Chztrnica v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 353 So. 2d 547, 550 (Fla. 1977) (noting that while there is "ordinarily . . . no independent tort for conspiracy," there is a narrow excepti

indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained not as a direct result of predicate acts . . . will not allow recovery under Florida RICO."' (quoting O'Malley v. St. Thomas Univ., Inc., 599 So. 2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992))) (emphasis added). Because the Amended Complaint does not satisfy the direct-in

ko, 446 So. 2d 1162, 1165 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).10 10 This case is governed by the general rule. Cf. Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 353 So. 2d 547, 550 (Fla. 1977) (noting that while there is "ordinarily ... no independent ton for conspiracy," there is a narrow exception

indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained not as a direct result of predicate acts . . . will not allow recovery under Florida RICO."' (quoting O'Malley v. St. Thomas Univ., Inc., 599 M. 2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992))) (emphasis added). Because the Amended Complaint does not satisfy the direct-inj

urko, 446 So. 2d 1162, 1165 (Ha. 5th DCA 1984) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).1° 10 This case is governed by the general rule. CI Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 353 So. 2d 547, 550 (Fla. 1977) (noting that while there is "ordinarily ... no independent tort for conspiracy," there is a narrow exception

'indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained not as a direct result of predicate acts . . wit! not allow recovery under Florida RICO."' (quoting O'Malley v. St. Univ., Inc., 599 So. 2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992))) (emphasis added). Because the Amended Complaint does not satisfy the direct-injury