EpsteinProject.org

Court records

056_3

Format
pdf
Set
Court Records
Text
Searchable

View at the original source

Text as released

Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.

Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 56 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2009 Page 1 of 10




                                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                             SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

     JANE DOE NO. 101,                                               CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON

               Plaintiff,
     vs.

     JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

               Defendant.
                                                   I

              PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. lOl'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S
     ;MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AS MODIFIED
      BY DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF ARGUMENTS I THROUGH VII
          OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED
                                  COMPLAINT

               Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 101, by and through her undersigned attorneys, hereby responds

     to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint [D.E. 29] ("Motion"), as

     modified by Defendant's Notice of Withdrawal [D.E. 53] ("Notice of Withdrawal") of

     Arguments I Through VII of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended

     Complaint and, as grounds, states as follows:

                                        Pleading Standard & Summary of Argument

               It is well settled in the context of a civil action that a valid complaint requires only "a short and

     plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P.

     8(a)(2). Defendant improperly attempts to heighten this standard through his characterization of

     this action as one that is essentially criminal and punitive in nature. Such a characterization is

     inappropriate, as this is a civil action that seeks only compensatory damages for the violation of

     certain of the predicate offenses of Section 2255 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code as set forth in the




Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, S

[…]

Open in the archive