062_4

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-80469-KAM Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2009 Page 1 of 9




                              UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                              SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                          CASE NO. 09-80469-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON

  JANE DOE II,

        Plaintiff,

  vs.

  JEFFREY EPSTEIN, and
  SARAH KELLEN,

        Defendants.
  __________________________/

            DEFENDANT KELLEN’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
                  TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

 1.     Admit that Plaintiff has sued Defendant Sarah Kellen (hereinafter “Defendant”) in this

        action.

                                 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

 2.     Admit that the action seeks damages in excess of $75,000. Deny that any damages are owed.

 3.     Admit that the facts alleged in the complaint, if true, create venue in this Court. As to the

        remaining allegations in paragraph 3, Defendant asserts her Fifth Amendment privilege

        against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th

        DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment’s Self-

        Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth

        Amendment - “[i]t would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity

        of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim

        was asserted in state or federal court.”); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure

        to Deny – Privilege Against Self-Incrimination (“…court must treat the defendant’s claim of
Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/21/2009 Page 2 of 9




       privilege as equivalent to a specific denial.”). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592.

       Defendants in civil actions. – “… a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not

       precluded from asserting t

[…]

Open in the archive