Epstein Secrets

ought, originally, in a federal district court." Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 83 (2005) (citi

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07121:2008 Page 6 of 100 1. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. 1 6).

ought, originally, in a federal district court." Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 83 (2005) (citi

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 6 of 100 I. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. ¶ 6).

ought, originally, in a federal district court." Lincoln Prop. Co.'. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 83 (2005) (citin

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 6 of 100 1. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-KAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. ¶ 6).

ought, originally, in a federal district court." Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 83 (2005) (citi

cument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 6 of 100 1. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000. This case is a duplicate of the First Federal Lawsuit. In that case, Jane Doe pled "damages in excess of $50 million." See Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-80069-ICAM (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 24, 2008) (Compl. ¶ 6)