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

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a

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

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a

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

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a

'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

entical injuries Jane Doe asserted in the First Federal Action, and are no less serious simply because pled under a state-court caption. Cf., e.g., Woods v. Southwest Airlines, Co., 523 F. Supp. 2d 812, 820 (N.D. III. 2007) (determining, in the context of diversity jurisdiction, that the $75,000 threshold had been satisfied, a