Epstein Secrets

Docket 03/03;2010 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80893-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant")'s Motion to Dismiss, for More Definite Statement &

stein. A list of more than 30 such minor females has previously been provided by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida to Epstein (but not to Jane Doe). See DE 38-2 at ¶ 4. Finally, Defendant argues, and Plaintiff concedes, that punitive damages are not available under 18 U.S

ICO statement that the "enterprise" consisted of Defendant Epstein, and his paid employees and . See Am. Comp. ¶

. 08-80893-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ORDER THIS CAUSE is before

s illicit as well as licit enterprises and governmental, as well as other, entities. There is a "distinctiveness" requirement for RICO enterprises. Florida Evergreen Foliage v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Co., 336 F.Supp.2d 1239, 1260-61 (S.D. Fla. 2004). To allege a RICO enterprise, Plaintiff must "name a RICO person di

The names of all of the victims are unknown to the plaintiff at this time. However, they include Jane Doe herself as well as the victim in E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein and L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein. A list of more than 30 such minor females has previously been provided by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern

stein. A list of more than 30 such minor females has previously been provided by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida to Epstein (but not to Jane Doe). See DE 38-2 at ¶ 4. Finally, Defendant argues, and Plaintiff concedes, that punitive damages are not available under 18 U.S

ICO statement that the "enterprise" consisted of Defendant Epstein, and his paid employees Sarah Kellen and Nadia Ma

. 08-80893-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ORDER THIS CAUSE is before

s illicit as well as licit enterprises and governmental, as well as other, entities. There is a "distinctiveness" requirement for RICO enterprises. Florida Evergreen Foliage v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Co., 336 F.Supp.2d 1239, 1260-61 (S.D. Fla. 2004). To allege a RICO enterprise, Plaintiff must "name a RICO person di

The names of all of the victims are unknown to the plaintiff at this time. However, they include Jane Doe herself as well as the victim in E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein and L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein. A list of more than 30 such minor females has previously been provided by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern

stein. A list of more than 30 such minor females has previously been provided by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida to Epstein (but not to Jane Doe). See DE 38-2 at ¶ 4. Finally, Defendant argues, and Plaintiff concedes, that punitive damages are not available under 18 U.S

ICO statement that the "enterprise" consisted of Defendant Epstein, and his paid employees and Sec Am. Comp. 1 43

. 08-80893-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ORDER THIS CAUSE is before

s illicit as well as licit enterprises and governmental, as well as other, entities. There is a "distinctiveness" requirement for RICO enterprises. Florida Evergreen Foliage v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Co., 336 F.Supp.2d 1239, 1260-61 (S.D. Fla. 2004). To allege a RICO enterprise, Plaintiff must "name a RICO person di