Epstein Secrets

ce where law mandated consecutive one); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (cou

stent with an intention of avoiding it, have the effect of an election to affirm. Hendricks v. Stark, 99 Fla. 277, 285 (Fla. 1930); AVVA-BC, LLC v. Amiel, 25 So.3d 7, 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) ("[W]here a party seeking rescission has discovered grounds for rescinding an agreement and either remains silen

to promise such a concurrent sentence); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 514-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (h

inguish that power by ratification of the contract.") (quoting John E. Murray, Jr., Murray on Contracts § 17, at 31 (3d ed. 1990)); AVVA-BC, LLC v. Amiel, 25 So. 3d 7, 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) ("[W]here a party seeking rescission has discovered grounds for rescinding an agreement and either remains sile

to promise such a concurrent sentence); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 514-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (h

nguish that power by ratification of the contract."') (quoting John E. Murray, Jr., Murray on Contracts § 17, at 31 (3d ed. 1990)); AVVA-BC, LLC v. Amiel, 25 So. 3d 7, 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) ("[W]here a party seeking rescission has discovered grounds for rescinding an agreement and either remains sile

to promise such a concurrent sentence); Ex parte Rich, 194 S.W.3d 508, 514-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (h

inguish that power by ratification of the contract.") (quoting John E. Murray, Jr., Murray on Contracts § 17, at 31 (3d ed. 1990)); AVVA-BC, LLC v. Amiel, 25 So. 3d 7, 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) ("[W]here a party seeking rescission has discovered grounds for rescinding an agreement and either remains sile