Epstein Secrets

ant. Bank Brussels Lambert v. Fiddler Gonzalez & Rodriguez, 171 F.3d 779, 784 (24 Cir.1999). Because these

in intentional wrongdoing—albeit extraterri- torially—expressly directed at forum") (citing Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. at 789-90, 104 S.Ct. 1482)); Time, Inc. v. Simpson, No. 02 Civ. 4917(MBM), 2003 WL 23018890, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2003) (finding Calder turned on "personal in- volvement of the indiv

went through these, it 19 seems to me that we have dealt with number 679, 716, in 20 connection with 683, 742, and 774. That deals with the 21 Rodriguez, we call it the unauthenticated hearsay document from 22 a suspect source. They call it the black book. I think the 23 Court heard argument about

no reason we should be allowed to ask about all these 14 other bad acts. 15 Sack cites, your Honor, to an Eleventh Circuit case, 16 Schafer vs. Time, Inc. In that case, your Honor, Sack says the 17 Eleventh Circuit found the district court had been correct when 18 it ruled that the defendant, which

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

no reason we should be allowed to ask about all these 14 other bad acts. 15 Sack cites, your Honor, to an Eleventh Circuit case, 16 Schafer vs. Time, Inc. In that case, your Honor, Sack says the 17 Eleventh Circuit found the district court had been correct when 18 it ruled that the defendant, which

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

ere is just no reason we should be allowed to ask about all these other bad acts. Sack cites, your Honor, to an Eleventh CircuLt case, Schafer vs. Time, Inc. In that case, your Honor, Sack says the Eleventh Circuit found the district court had been correct when it ruled that the defendant, which allegedl

dant. Bank Brussels Lambert v. Fiddler Gonzalez & Rodriguez, 171 F.3d 779, 784 (2d Cir.1999). Because these m

nt in intentional wrongdoing—albeit extraterri- torially—expressly directed at forum”) (citing Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. at 789-90, 104 S.Ct. 1482)); Time, Inc. v. Sumpson, No. 02 Civ. 49170MBM), 2003 WL 23018890, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2003) (finding Calder turned on “personal in- volvement of the individu