Case File
efta-efta00880972DOJ Data Set 9OtherFrom: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]>
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta00880972
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
Extracted Text (OCR)
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]>
To: Martin Weinberg
Subject: Re:
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:03:42 +0000
add HAD AT THE VERY SAME TIME TO MAKE CLEAR added this fn before conclusion upon
receiving Bob's info on Jane Doe II:
FN — That Jane Doe 101 did not meet the threshold requirements for the imposition of the waiver of liability
portion of par 8 of the NPA is demonstrated by the filings of Jane Doe II in 09-80469-CIV-Marra, a federal
lawsuit bring "exclusively 2255" claims while Jane Doe II had AT THE VERY SAME TIME a separate state
court suit seeking damages against Epstein for sexual assault and conspiracy. Jane Doe II first claimed the
benefits of the NPA but then withdrew that claim at the June 12, 2009 hearing agreeing that the state filing
negated the "exclusivity" of the federal 2255 lawsuit. On the current record, nothing prevents Jane Doe 101
from filing a parallel state court claim thus she has not, by affirmative waiver filed before the challenged Motion
to Dismiss, committed herself to a litigation strategy that would potentially qualify her for the waiver of liability
obligation
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Martin Weinberg <
wrote:
I added this fn before conclusion upon receiving Bob's info on Jane Doe II:
FN - That Jane Doe 101 did not meet the threshold requirements for the imposition of the waiver of liability
portion of par 8 of the NPA is demonstrated by the filings of Jane Doe II in 09-80469-CIV-Marra, a federal
lawsuit bring "exclusively 2255" claims while Jane Doe II had a separate state court suit seeking damages
against Epstein for sexual assault and conspiracy. Jane Doe II first claimed the benefits of the NPA but then
withdrew that claim at the June 12, 2009 hearing agreeing that the state filing negated the "exclusivity" of the
federal 2255 lawsuit. On the current record, nothing prevents Jane Doe 101 from filing a parallel state court
claim thus she has not, by affirmative waiver filed before the challenged Motion to Dismiss, committed herself
to a litigation strategy that would potentially qualify her for the waiver of liability obligation
From: Jeffrey Epstein
To: Martin Weinberg • Jay Lefkowitz • Darren Indyke
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 8:44 AM
EFTA00880972
Technical Artifacts (1)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
Email
[email protected]Related Documents (6)
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
From: Darren Indyke
4p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
DS9 Document EFTA00429389
6p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
From: "Martin Weinberg"
1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
2p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
From: Jeevacation <jeevacation®gmail.com>
1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
From: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation®gmail.com>
2p
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.