Epstein Secrets

5 (L.M. v. Epstein). In both amended complaints, petitioners "briefly alleged" some more about the non-prosecution agreement: 20. In June 2008, in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, entered pleas of "guilty" to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of

stoppel does not apply to them because the government has not established one of the elements of the three-part test examined in Tampa Bay Water v. HDR Engineering, Inc., 731 F.3d 1171 (11th Cir. 2013). D.E. 416 at 60. Specifically, petitioners contend the government has not demonstrated the second factor, that petit

5 (L.M. v. Epstein). In both amended complaints, petitioners "briefly alleged" some more about the non-prosecution agreement: 20. In June 2008, in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, entered pleas of "guilty" to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of

stoppel does not apply to them because the government has not established one of the elements of the three-part test examined in Tampa Bay Water v. HDR Engineering, Inc., 731 F.3d 1171 (11th Cir. 2013). D.E. 416 at 60. Specifically, petitioners contend the government has not demonstrated the second factor, that petit

nts, and precluded by the doctrines of equitable and judicial estoppel. 7 EFTA00299027 BACKGROUND On July 19, 2006, Mr. Epstein was indicted in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County on one count of solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Fla. Stat. §796.07. See State v. Jeffiey E. Epstein, 50-

F.2d 1324, 20 EFTA00299040 1325 (9th Cir. 1975). As this Court has recognized, "a contracting party is the paradigm of an indispensable party." HDR Engineering, Inc. v. R.C.T. Engineering, Inc., No. 08- 81040-CIV-ICAM, 2010 WL 2402908, *2 (S.D.Fla. June 15, 2010) (citation omitted). "Parties to a contract are ind