Epstein Secrets

federal courts [to] 'incorporat[e] [state law ] as the federal rule of decision." • Kamen, 500 U.S. at 98 (emphasis added) (quoting United States v. Kimball Foods, Inc., 440 U.S. 715, 728, 99 S.Ct. 1448, 59 L.Ed.2d 711 (1979)). Second, application of state substantive law directly on point is eminently more

Premises, however, until several months later. In March of 1996, Epstein SDNY_GM_02742794 EFTA_00229443 EFTA01325009 commenced negotiations with Xenophon Galinas for a possible sublease or assignment of the Premises. The proposed arrangement between Epstein and Galinas included payment by Galinas to Epstein

"federal courts [to] 'incorporat[e] [state law ] as the federal rule of decision."' Kamen, 500 U.S. at 98 (emphasis added) (quoting United States v. Kimball Foods, Inc., 440 U.S. 715, 728, 99 S.Ct. 1448, 59 L.Ed.2d 711 (1979)). Second, application of state substantive law directly on point is eminently more l

did not discover that Epstein had abandoned the Premises, however, until several months later. In March of 1996, Epstein commenced negotiations with Xenophon Galinas for a possible sublease or assignment of the Premises. The proposed arrangement between Epstein and Galinas included payment by Galinas to Epstein

"federal courts [to] 'incorporat[e] [state law ] as the federal rule of decision." ' Kamen, 500 U.S. at 98 (emphasis added) (quoting United States I Kimball Foods, Inc., 440 U.S. 715, 728, 99 S.Ct. 1448, 59 L.Ed.2d 711 (1979)). Second, application of state substantive law directly on point is eminently more l

did not discover that Epstein had abandoned the Premises, however, until several months later. In March of 1996, Epstein commenced negotiations with Xenophon Galinas for a possible sublease or assignment of the Premises. The proposed arrangement between Epstein and Galinas included payment by Galinas to Epstein