Epstein Secrets

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

tments Owner, LLC v. Einery Bay PKI, LLC, 2009 WL 1124451 (Del. Ch. Apr. 20, 2009) 27 Beck & Panico Builders, Inc. v. Strairman, 2009 WL 5177160 (Del. Super. Nov. 23, 2009) 21, 22 Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund II, LP, 624 A.2d 1199 (Del. 1993) lotea. Commcins, Inc. v. D

d (4) the Court can only avoid injustice by finding that the promise is binding." Beck & Panico Builders, Inc. v. Straitman, 2009 WL 5177160, at *6 (Del. Super. Nov. 23, 2009). 21 EFTA00613928 On the other hand, if Your Honor determines that FTC had a right to withdraw all of its investments at the end

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

was the Fund's in-house lawyers who actually put the words of the Side Letter on paper. See L U. N. Am., Inc. v. A.LU. Ins. Co., 896 A.2d 880, 885 (Del. Super. 2006) ("Where all parties to a contract are knowledgeable, there is no reason for [construing ambiguities] against the party who drafted the final

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

s, Inc., 954 A.2d 335 (Del. Ch. 2008) 30 Lazard Debt Recovery GP, LLC v. Weinstock, 864 A.2d 955 (Del. Ch. 2004) 48 Mack v. White, 165 A. 150 (Del. Super. 1933), 48 Osborn v. Kemp, 991 A.2d 1153 (Del. 2010) 30 iii EFTA00613943 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES (Continued) Schmeusser v. Schmeusser, 559 A.