Legal filing from June 12, 2009, in the case of Jane Doe No. 101 v. Jeffrey Epstein in the Southern District of Florida. Epstein's legal team withdraws seven specific arguments previously made in a Motion to Dismiss regarding the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, including arguments about the plaintiff's minority status and predicate offenses. The defense states it will now rely solely on arguments regarding count merger and subparagraph D.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Defendant |
Party withdrawing arguments from Motion to Dismiss
|
| Jane Doe No. 101 | Plaintiff |
Party bringing suit against Epstein
|
| Robert C. Josefsberg | Attorney |
Counsel for Plaintiff
|
| Katherine W. Ezell | Attorney |
Counsel for Plaintiff
|
| Jack Alan Goldberger | Attorney |
Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein
|
| Robert D. Critton, Jr. | Attorney |
Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein (Signatory)
|
| Michael J. Pike | Attorney |
Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court Southern District of Florida |
Court where case is filed
|
|
| Podhurst Orseck, P.A. |
Law firm representing the Plaintiff
|
|
| Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. |
Law firm representing the Defendant
|
|
| Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman |
Law firm representing the Defendant (filing firm)
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Address for Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
|
|
|
Address for Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
|
|
|
Address for Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman
|
"Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby withdraws arguments I through VII as set forth in the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss"Source
"Defendant will rely only on those arguments set forth in subparagraph D, on page 3, and Paragraph VIII (Any Surviving Count Should Be Merged Into A Single Count)"Source
Complete text extracted from the document (2,986 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document