Epstein Secrets

the "oral contract" claim and Claimants' claim for a declaration of Jeepers's rights with respect to the Fund. Additionally, we understand that the Zwirn Parties contend that the extrinsic evidence is, in any event, relevant to their "exculpatory clause" defense to Jeepers's fraud and breach of fiduci

and contemporaneous e-mails concerning the Side Letter, (see, e.g., December 2004 E-mail Correspondence between Mr. Zwim and Mr. Dubin, Ex. K (Mr. Zwirn: "we're done, ftc in for $20mi1 jan 1 L.P. . . . This is the last 2 year money will 20 EFTA00614019 take from anyone of course"; Mr. Dubin: "of c

Opportunities Fund, L.P. k/n/a Fortress Value Recovery Fund I LLC ((the) "Fund"), [and] D.B. Zwim Partners, LLC, D.B. Zwim & Co. L.P., DBZ GP LLC, Zwirn Holdings LLC, and Daniel Zwirn [together, the "Zwim Parties")." (Financial Trust Company, Inc.'s and Jeepers Inc.'s Motion In Limine to Exclude Extrinsic Eviden

were invalid and set forth the schedule of eligible withdrawal dates for FTC's investments. FTC did not respond to the letter by claiming that Mr. Zwirn had promised to honor FTC's demand for $80 million. 17 EFTA00613924 FTC subsequently submitted a request for complete withdrawal on February 13,

Zwinz & Co., L.P., DBZ GP, LLC, and Zwirn Holdings, LLC EFTA00613904 Table of Contents Preliminary Statement 1 Statement of Facts 2 A. Mr. Zwirn's Personal Background 2 B. DBZ Background 2 I. DBZ's Investment Strategy 3 2. Mr. Zwirn's Role at DBZ 3 3. Mr. Dubin's Involvement with D

LLC was DBZ's General Partner. Third-Party Respondent Zwim Holdings LLC was a member of DBZ GP LLC and D.B. Zwim Partners, LLC. Under Delaware law„ Zwirn Holdings LLC cannot be held liable solely on the basis of its membership in the limited liability companies. 6 Del. C. § 18-303; see also Thomas v. Hobbs, 2005 W

after the Fund self-reported the issues in 2006. At the conclusion of its investigation, the SEC elected not to charge Mr. Zwirn or any of the other Zwirn Parties with any wrongdoing, but charged Mr. Gruss with aiding and abetting violations of the Investment Advisers Act for knowingly misusing his au

COUNTERCLAIMS 42 A. Jeepers Has No Claim for Promissory Estoppel Because There Was No Promise 42 B. Jeepers Has No Claim for Fraud Because Mr. Zwirn Fully Disclosed All Accounting Irregularities and Made No Misrepresentations to Mr. Epstein 43 C. Jeepers's Claim for Breach of Fiduciary Duty o

"). Third-Party Respondent DBZ GP LLC was the general partner of the Investment Manager (the "Zwirn Investment Manager GP"). Third- Party Respondent Zwirn Holdings LLC was a holding company that held interests in the 4 EFTA00613948 Zwirn Fund GP and the Zwirn Investment Manager GP. Third-Party Respondent Daniel