Epstein Secrets

ite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc., 2011 WL 2416247, *3 (S.D. Fla. June 13, 2011) (Marra, J.) ("restoring the parties to the status quo ante is an element of a rescission claim"); see also, e.g., Banco, 400 F.3d at 1312; AVVA-BC, 25 So.

proceedings should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., In re Jacks, 642 F.3d 1323, 1332 (1 1 th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011

ite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc., 2011 WL 2416247, *3 (S.D. Fla. June 13, 2011) (Marra, J.) ("restoring the parties to the status quo ante is an element of a rescission claim"); see also, e.g., Banco, 400 F.3d at 1312; AVVA-BC, 25 So.

proceedings should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., In re Jacks, 642 F.3d 1323, 1332 (1 1 th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011

ite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc., 2011 WL 2416247, *3 (S.D. Fla. June 13, 2011) (Marra, J.) ("restoring the parties to the status quo ante is an element of a rescission claim"); see also, e.g., Blinco, 400 F.3d at 1312; AVVA-BC, 25 So.

proceedings should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., In re Jacks, 642 F.3d 1323, 1332 (1 1 th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011

ite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc., 2011 WL 2416247, *3 (S.D. Fla. June 13, 2011) (Marra, J.) ("restoring the parties to the status quo ante is an element of a rescission claim"); see also, e.g., Banco, 400 F.3d at 1312; AVVA-BC, 25 So.

e proceedings should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., In re Jacks, 642 F.3d 1323, 1332 (11th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011

PAGE BREAK --- Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 205-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/05/2013 Page 14 of 20 jurisdiction to hear the case.")); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994) ("The question of ripeness `goes to whether the district court had subject matter jurisdiction.") (quoting Gre

oe No. 2 v. United States, Case No. 08- 80736-Civ-Marra (S.D. Fla.). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that disclosu