Epstein Secrets

d, Ste. 1200 Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33301 s/ Brenda Rodriguez 11 EFTA00591589

duct, not an attack on plaintiffs."); McNamee v. Clemens, 762 F.Supp.2d 584, 601 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) ("[G]eneral denials aren't actionable."); Davis v. Boeheim, 24 N.Y.3d 262, 271-72 (N.Y. 2014). Plaintiff unsuccessfully attempts to analogize the subject Statement to those in Boeheim and Clemens. Yet in bo

onor, when I went through these, it seems to me that we have dealt with number 679, 716, in connection with 683, 742, and 774. That deals with the Rodriguez, we call it the unauthenticated hearsay document from a suspect source. They call it the black book. I think the Court heard argument about all of

5 H3VOGIU1 alleged to have defamed someone based on facts, not opinions. THE COURT: Agreed. Agreed. MS. MENNINGER: And so she can -- the Davis v. Boeheim case is a perfect example of that, your Honor. She can only speak to facts about which she has personal knowledge. If plaintiff goes and proves th

tion with 683, 742, and 774. That deals with the Rodriguez, we call it the unauthenticated hearsay document

5 H3VOGIU1 alleged to have defamed someone based on facts, not opinions. THE COURT: Agreed. Agreed. MS. MENNINGER: And so she can -- the Davis v. Boeheim case is a perfect example of that, your Honor. She can only speak to facts about which she has personal knowledge. If plaintiff goes and proves that