Epstein Secrets

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

sages from other people (see, e.g., Am. Compl. TV 9, 11, 12, 32), those activities are not alleged in any way to have impacted Jane Doe. Cf., e.g., Palmas Y Bambu, S.A. v. F..I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., Inc., 881 So. 2d 565, 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (holding that "'indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained

'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

sages from other people (see, e.g., Am. Compl. ¶¶ 9, I I, 12, 32), those activities are not alleged in any way to have impacted Jane Doe. CI, e.g., Palmas Y Bambu, S.A. v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Ca, Inc., 881 So. 2d 565, 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (holding that "'indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained no

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

ages from other people (see, e.g., Am. Compl. ti 9, I I, 12, 32), those activities are not alleged in any way to have impacted Jane Doe. Cf., e.g., Palmas Y Bambu, S.A. v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., Inc., 881 So. 2d 565, 570 (Ha. 3d DCA 2004) (holding that "'indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained no

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

sages from other people (see, e.g., Am. Compl. ¶¶ 9, 11, 12, 32), those activities are not alleged in any way to have impacted Jane Doe. Cf., e.g., Palmas Y Bambu, S.A. v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., Inc., 881 E. 2d 565, 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (holding that "'indirect injuries, that is injuries sustained no