Epstein Secrets

(Fla. 1950) (observing that "'instances of conspiracy which is in itself an independent tort are rare and should be added to with caution" (quoting Fleming v. Dane, 22 N.E.2d 609, 611, (Mass. 1939))) (emphasis added). Plainly, this case involves the general rule, not the narrow exception, because only one pers

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07121:2008 Page 6 of 100 1. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. 1 6).

(Fla. 1950) (observing that "'instances of conspiracy which is in itself an independent tort are rare and should be added to with caution" (quoting Fleming v. Dane, 22 N.E.2d 609, 611, (Mass. 1939))) (emphasis added). Plainly, this case involves the general rule, not the narrow exception, because only one pers

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 6 of 100 I. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. ¶ 6).

(Fla. 1950) (observing that -'instances of conspiracy which is in itself an independent tort are rare and should be added to with caution' (quoting Fleming v. Dane, 22 N.E.2d 609, 611, (Mails. 1939))) (emphasis added). Plainly, th;s Cat ;nvulvcs dic genera-rule, not the narrow exception, because only one perso

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 6 of 100 1. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. ¶ 6).

(Fla. 1950) (observing that "'instances of conspiracy which is in itself an independent tort are rare and should be added to with caution" (quoting Fleming v. Dane, 22 N.E.2d _609,41-1-,-(Mass,1939-M-(emphaffis-added). Plainlyithis-ctbe involvcb die geucral rule, not the narrow exception, because only one pers

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 6 of 100 1. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-ICAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. ¶ 6)