Epstein Secrets

nths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis "Fein 1059 044.444vEleuf Skim 340, E0coRuT Good, Etas 33133 1

t of removal. The removal statute was enacted specifically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [

onths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. FM. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (FM. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis 'reins. 30$96amailonsuL Sum 340,CoColtui Gaon, Foram 33133 1 01

ht of removal. The removal statute was enacted specifically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (1Ith Cir. 2005). Cf, e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Stipp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right

nths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis 'Fein PI. 3059 GuADAvinui. Surf 340,ECcONLIT Glow, Ft0INDA 3311

t of removal. The removal statute was enacted specifically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [

ths ago, this plaintiff filed virtually the identical lawsuit in this Court. Sec Jane Doc III v. Epstein, Case No. 08 cv 80069 KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis "rein 30S9GKAKAAviAut,Suin 340,EocoorutSkOvr,FFOROA33133 1.151

t of removal. The removal statute was enacted specifically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [