Epstein Secrets

n to introduce him to an "exceptional investment opportunity." (Compl. P 13.) In follow-up telephone conversations during that same two week period, Davison and her associates r 5] made additional specific representations about the AIG Investment, without disclosing Citibank and AIG's relationship. Davi

volved in the deal. (Compl. P 14.) In August 2001, in an effort to dissuade Epstein from seeking to remove AIG as the manager of the AIG Investment, John Purcell, a Citibank representative, told Jeffrey Schantz, a lawyer for Epstein, that Citibank was acting in Epstein's interests and that Epstein should tru

naged by MG. (Compl. 1112, 24; Epstein Decl. 118-10; Davison Aft 11 1, 102-18.) According to the plaintiffs, during the negotiations of this deal Davison represented to Epstein that he was "virtually assured of receiving an 18-20% return on [his] investment, with a possible return of as much as 80%"

lved in the deal. (Comp1.1 14.) In August 2001, in an effort to dissuade Epstein from seeking to remove AIG as the manager of the AIG Investment, John Purcell, a Citibank representative, told Jeffrey Schantz, a lawyer for Ep- stein, that Citibank was acting in Ep- stein's interests and that Epstein should

o introduce him to an "exceptional investment opportunity." (Compl. 9f 13.) In follow-up telephone conversations during that same two week period, Davison and her associates made additional specific representations about the AIG Investment, without disclosing Citibank and AIG's relationship. Davison a

00723 EFTA00228103 Financial Trust Co. v. Citibank Civil No. 02-108 Memorandum Opinion Page 5 remove AIG as the manager of the AIG Investment, John Purcell, a Citibank representative, told Jeffrey Schantz, a lawyer for Epstein, that Citibank was acting in Epstein's interests and that Epstein should tr