Epstein Secrets

1) 11 Night Hawk Ltd. v. Briarpatch Ltd.. L.P., No. 03 Civ. 1382 RWS, 2003 WL 23018833 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2003) 10, 11 Oppenheimer Fund. Inc. v. Sanders 437 U.S. 340 (1978) 10 Patterson v. Burge. No. 03 C 4433, 2005 WL 43240 (N.D. III. Jan 6, 2005) 4.5 Persky v. Yeshiva Univ. No. 01 Civ. 4278 (

eral law are "identical" to those under the applicable New York statute.— See Persky. supra. 2002 WL 31769704, at *3 (McKenna. J.). " Notably. Mr. Fisten claims he "wrote up a report memorializing what Rush had told me" shortly after his conversation with Mr. Rush (Fisten Aft*" I I) but chooses not to

1) 11 Night Hawk Ltd. v. Briarpatch Ltd.. L.P., No. 03 Civ. 1382 RWS, 2003 WL 23018833 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2003) 10, 11 Oppenheimer Fund. Inc. v. Sanders 437 U.S. 340 (1978) 10 Patterson v. Burge. No. 03 C 4433, 2005 WL 43240 (N.D. III. Jan 6, 2005) 4.5 Persky v. Yeshiva Univ. No. 01 Civ. 4278 (

eral law are "identical" to those under the applicable New York statute.— See Persky, supra. 2002 WL 31769704, at *3 (McKenna. J.). " Notably. Mr. Fisten claims he "wrote up a report memorializing what Rush had told me" shortly after his conversation with Mr. Rush (Fisten Aft*" I I) but chooses not to

ther harassing actions against Jane Doe also followed. See Motion for Contempt filed by Edwards in Jane Doe v. Epstein detailing the event, including Fisten Affidavit attached to Motion, Composite Exhibit “RR.” Epstein Settlement of Civil Claims Against Him for Sexual Abuse of Children 84. The civil case

, 43 (Fla. 1966), It is not enough for the —— party merely to assert that an issue of fact does exist. Fisel v. Wynns, 667 So.2d 761, 764 (Fla.1996); Landers v. Milton, 370 So.2d 368, 370 (Fla.1979) (same). | Moreover, it is well-recognized that the non-moving party faced with a summary judgment motion su