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

. STAT. IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS, FOR MORE DEFINITE STAEMENT, AND TO STRIKE DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 1. Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So.2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005) 2. Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Ferre, 636 F.Supp. 970 (S.D. Fla. 1985) 3. Mantooth v. Rich

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

. STAT. IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS, FOR MORE DEFINITE STAEMENT, AND TO STRIKE DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 1. Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So.2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005) 2. Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Ferre, 636 F.Supp. 970 (S.D. Fla. 1985) 3. Mantooth v. Rich

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

or "violation of Chapter 800, Florida Statutes" (Am. Compl. ¶ 18) because there is no private right of action under that Chapter. See generally Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So. 2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005) (observing that "not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy" (citing Villazon v

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

or "violation of Chapter 800, Florida Statutes" (Am. Compl. ¶ 18) because there is no private right of action under that Chapter. See generally Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So. 2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005) (observing that "not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy" (citing Villazon v

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

or "violation of Chapter 800, Florida Statutes" (Am. Compl. ¶ 18) because there is no private right of action under that Chapter. See generally Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So. 2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005) (observing that "not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy" (citing Villazon v

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

or "violation of Chapter 800, Florida Statutes" (Am. Compl. ¶ 18) because there is no private right of action under that Chapter. See generally Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So. 2d 360, 374 (Fla. 2005) (observing that "not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy" (citing Villazon v