Epstein Secrets

econd amended complaint (the "Fisher counterclaim"), is granted in all respects. The Soffer ejectment motion is granted as against deft Ron Soffer. Defls Jeffrey E. Epstein, Ivan S. Fisher, Ellyn Bank, Debra Elisa Cohen, Dianeataga?/a The Fisher Group, Fisher & Soffer a/k/a Fisher & Sophir, D. Gerzog, Robert Heilbum,

the house to the tenant we have selected should Mr. Epstein decide not to reoccupy the premises under the ne

on of the budding pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. § 4301 of seq. 0FM leased the building to defen- dant Jeffrey E. Epstein in 1992. Epstein sublet the building to defendant Ivan S. Fish- er in 1996, purportedly without the Govern- ment's consent. Fisher, in turn, sublet a portion of the

n personally liable because Epstein did not sign the con- tract as an agent or as a corporate officer. Epstein signed the contract as follows: /s/ Jeffery Epstein 1AG. Under New York law, a signature in a representative capacity would have been "Jeffrey Epstein for I.A.G." or "I.A.G., by Jeffrey Epstein". 2

atters extrinsic to the complaint. we will treat defendant Epstein's motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judg

RDERED. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, I Jeffrey E. EPSTEIN, Ivan S. Fisher, Ellyn Bank, Debra Elis

RDERED. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, I Jeffrey E. EPSTEIN, Ivan S. Fisher, Ellyn Bank, Debra Elise

ed, the Government should have as much discretion as possible. Noting that federal landlord-tenant law does not exist, Judge Posner stated in Pow- The Federal Courts could of course create that law, picking and choosing among ex- isting state laws and proposed reforms in accordance with the recommendations of k

the house to the tenant we have selected should Mr. Epstein decide not to reoccupy the premises under the ne

e K. Nakano, Esq., Assistant United States Attorney, New York, for the United States. Wachtel & Masyr, LLP, By Steven J. Cohen, Esq., New York, for Jeffrey E. Epstein. Gage & Pavlis, By G. Robert Gage, Jr., Esq., Ellen J. Casey, Esq., New York, for Ivan S. Fisher, Diane Fisher d/b/a The Fisher Group, and Fisher &

ion of the building pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act, 22 U.S.C. s 4301 et seq. OFM leased the building to defendant Jeffrey E. Epstein in 1992. Epstein sublet the building to defendant Ivan S. Fisher in 1996, purportedly without the Government's consent. Fisher, in turn, sublet a portion of the buil

N.Y.)) United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Jeffrey E. EPSTEIN, Ivan S. Fisher, Ellyn Bank, Debra Elisa

N.Y.)) United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Jeffrey E. EPSTEIN, Ivan S. Fisher, Ellyn Bank, Debra Elisa

, the Government should have as much discretion as possible. Noting that federal landlord-tenant law does not exist, Judge Posner stated in Powers: The Federal Courts could of course create that law, picking and choosing among existing state laws and proposed reforms in accordance with the recommendations of emin

' Rights Act ("CVRA"), 18 U.S.C. § 3771, that affect all crime victims in this Circuit. After over a decade of litigation, the Majority holds that Jeffrey Epsteie's victims were not authorized to bring this petition because the CVRA does not permit stand- alone suits, and, therefore, it should have been dismisse

pstein. In her mandamus petition, Ms. Wild asserts that when federal prosecutors secretly negotiated and executed a non- prosecution agreement with Epstein in 2007, they violated her rights under the CVRA—in particular, her rights to confer with and to be treated fairly by the government's lawyers. We

ida to some extent). While he was in custody on these charges, Epstein was found dead. Statement of Attorney General William P. Barr on the Death of Jeffrey Epstein (Aug. 10, 2018), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pristatement-attorney-general-william-p- barr-death-jeffrey-epstein. In June 2020,

t resolves the federal investigation by allowing Mr. Epstein to plead to a state offense. The victims identifi

ted" as "an uncontroversial and central element of our understanding of federal judicial power." Richard H. Fallon, Jr. et al., Hart and Wechsler's The Federal Courts and the Federal System 50 (7th ed. 2015). The rule that federal courts do not issue advisory opinions can be traced back to the Founding era. In 1