Epstein Secrets

A00799521 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 205-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/05/2013 Page 29 of 101 See I 3A CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT & ARTHUR R. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE & PROCEDURE § 3531.6 (3d ed. 2011). However, § 3771(d)(6) provides that the act does not authorize a cause of action for breach of which the United States or a

recognition of the contract as subsisting or any conduct inconsistent with an intention of avoiding it, have the effect of an election to affirm. Hendricks v. Stark, 99 Fla. 277, 285, 126 So. 293, 296-97 (Fla. 1930) (internal quotation omitted); see, e.g., United States v. Baird, 218 F.3d 221, 230-31 (3d Cir. 20

A00795197 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 205-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/05/2013 Page 29 of 101 See I 3A CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT & ARTHUR R. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE & PROCEDURE § 3531.6 (3d ed. 2011). However, § 3771(d)(6) provides that the act does not authorize a cause of action for breach of which the United States or a

recognition of the contract as subsisting or any conduct inconsistent with an intention of avoiding it, have the effect of an election to affirm. Hendricks v. Stark, 99 Fla. 277, 285, 126 So. 293, 296-97 (Fla. 1930) (internal quotation omitted); see, e.g., United States v. Baird, 218 F.3d 221, 230-31 (3d Cir. 20

TA00081042 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 205-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/05/2013 Page 29 of 101 See 13A CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT & ARTHUR R. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE & PROCEDURE § 3531.6 (3d ed. 2011). However, § 3771(d)(6) provides that the act does not authorize a cause of action for breach of which the United States or a

recognition of the contract as subsisting or any conduct inconsistent with an intention of avoiding it, have the effect of an election to affirm. Hendricks v. Stark, 99 Fla. 277, 285, 126 So. 293, 296-97 (Fla. 1930) (internal quotation omitted); see, e.g., United States v. Baird, 218 F.3d 221, 230-31 (3d Cir. 20

y and privacy, and "to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case." 27 EFTA00208849 See I 3A CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT & ARTHUR R. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE & PROCEDURE § 3531.6 (3d ed. 2011). However, § 3771(d)(6) provides that the act does not authorize a cause of action for breach of which the United States or a

recognition of the contract as subsisting or any conduct inconsistent with an intention of avoiding it, have the effect of an election to affirm. Hendricks v. Stark, 99 Fla. 277, 285, 126 So. 293, 296-97 (Fla. 1930) (internal quotation omitted); see, e.g., United States v. Baird, 218 F.3d 221, 230-31 (3d Cir. 20