EFTA00175589

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd 
Page 21 of 21 
in Opposition to Motion, 11,1 Plaintiffs MOTION Plaintiffi Jane Doe No. 101 
and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No-Contact Order, a Defendant's MOTION 
to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas 
(replaces Docket entry 90) by Jeffrey Epstein (Pike, Michael) Modified on 
6/8/2009 (tp). (Entered: 06/05/2009) 
06/05/2009 
142 NOTICE of Striking 141 Notice of Supplemental Authority, filed by Jeffrey 
Epstein by Jeffrey Epstein (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 06/05/2009) 
06/05/2009 
14,1 Notice of Supplemental Authority re 24 Response in Opposition to Motion, 6,2 
Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP, 9 Response in 
Opposition to Motion, 119 Response/Reply (Other), 68 Defendant's MOTION 
to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogs by Jeffrey Epstein (Pike, Michael) 
(Entered: 06/05/2009) 
06/08/2009 
144 RESPONSE to Motion re (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION 
to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas 
(replaces Docket entry 90) filed by Jane Doe. Replies due by 6/18/2009. 
(Attachments: # I Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-
ICAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 
06/08/2009 
14,E NOTICE by Jane Doe re (113 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Plaintiffs MOTION 
Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe IO2's Motion for No-Contact Order 
-Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder Associated Cases: 9:08-ev-80119-
KAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 
06/08/2009 
14k RESPONSE in Opposition re 144 Defendant's MOTION to Strike Cases from 
Current Trial Docket filed by Jane Doe. (Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 
06/08/2009) 
06/08/2009 
147 RESPONSE in Opposition re 104 Defendant's MOTION to Strike Cases from 
Current Trial Docket filed by 
.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 
Exhibit 2)(Hill, Jack) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 
06/09/2009 
. 14$ Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct e Answer to Amended Complaint 
by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 6/26/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 
"A", # 2 Exhibit "B", # a Text of Proposed Order Order)(Pike, Michael) 
(Entered: 06/09/2009) 
PACER Service Center 
Transaction Receipt 
06/09/2009 15:28:57 
PACER Login: du4480 
Client Code: 
Description: 
Docket Report Search Criteria: K 
9:Am08-c 
v-80119- 
rBillable Pages: 16 
Cost: 
1.28 
• 
https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/egi-bin/DktRpt.p17482840805650403-L_801_0-1 
6/9/2009 
EFTA00175609

Case 9:08-cv-80, 
1-KAM 
Document 40 
Entered 
'LSD Docket 0; 
,/2008 
Page 1 of 8 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
JANE DOE NO. 2, 
Plaintiff, 
vs. 
JEFFREY EPSTEIN 
Defendant. 
MOTION TO DISMISS 
Defendant Jeffrey Epstein, pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of 
Civil Procedure and Rule 7.1(A) of the Local Rules for the Southern District of 
Florida, moves to dismiss Count I of plaintiff's complaint,' and states as follows: 
' The time to answer the remaining allegations of the complaint is tolled pending the Court's 
ruling on the present motion. See Beaulieu I Bd. of Trustees of Univ. of W. Fla., No. 
3:07cv30/RV/BMT, 2007 WI, 2020161, * 2 (N. . Fla. July 9, 2007) (holding that defendant's 
partial motion to dismiss "automatically extends its time to answer . . . until after the court has 
ruled on [its] motion to dismiss"); Finnegan t Univ. of Rochester Med. Ctr., 180 F.R.D. 247, 
249 (W.D.N.Y. 1998) (concluding "that the ling of a motion that only addresses part of a 
complaint suspends the time to res nd to the entire complaint, not just to the claims that are the 
subject of the motion"); Schwartz 
Berry College, Inc., No. Civ.A. 4:96CV338-HLM, 1997 WL 
i
579166, *1 (N.D. Ga. July 3, 1 7) (noting that there is significant case law to support the 
position that "when a defendant files a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss, addressing only some of 
the claims contained in the plaintiff's complaint, the defendant is not required to file an answer 
until the court rules on the motion to dismiss"). 
EFTA00175610

Case 9:08-cv-8C 
\ -KAM 
Document 40 
Entered a 
'LSD Docket 0: 
/2008 
Page 2 of 8 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
ALLEGATIONS IN PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 
This action arises out of the alleged assault of the plaintiff. According to the 
allegations in her complaint, the plaintiff went to Mr. Epstein's house to give him 
"a massage for monetary compensation" (Compl. ¶ 12), where Mr. Epstein 
allegedly assaulted her "in violation of Chapter 800 of the Florida Statutes." 
(Compl. ¶ 18). 
The plaintiff tries to assert a claim for sexual assault (Compl. ¶¶ 15-19.) 
This theory of liability, however, cannot be supported by the allegations in the 
complaint. In fact, even if everything in the complaint were true, recovery against 
Jeffrey Epstein, for Count I, under any formulation, is impossible under Florida 
law. Accordingly, this count must be dismissed. 
ARGUMENT 
A motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) should be granted when a 
court cannot identify "each of the material elements necessary to sustain a 
recovery under some viable legal theory." Snow'. DirectTV, Inc., 450 F.3d 1314, 
1320 (I lth Cir. 2006) (quoting Roe'. Aware Woman Ctr. For Choice, Inc., 253 
F.3d 678, 684 (11th Cir. 2001)). Moreover, a court should dismiss a complaint 
"when, on the basis of a dispositive issue of law, no construction of the factual 
allegations will support a cause of action." Marshall County Bd. of Educ. I. 
Marshal County Gas Dist, 992 F.2d 1171, 1174 (11th Cir. 1993). "[T]o survive a 
2 
EFTA00175611

Case 9:08-cv-80 
'-KAM 
Document 40 
Entered I 
'LSD Docket Ot 
/2008 
Page 3 of 8 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
motion to dismiss, plaintiffs must do more than merely state legal conclusions; 
they are required to allege some specific factual bases for those conclusions . . ." 
Holt'. Grist, No. 06-14617, 2007 WI, 1156938, *2 (11th Cir. Apr. 19, 2007). As 
such, "conclusory allegations, unwarranted deductions of facts or legal conclusions 
masquerading as facts will not prevent dismissal." Snow, 450 F.3d at 1320. 
I. 
Count I Fails to State a Cause of Action For Assault Recognized by 
Florida Law. 
The plaintiff attempts to plead a cause of action against Mr. Epstein for 
"sexual assault" based on a "violation of Chapter 800 of the Florida Statutes"2 for 
the "lewd and lascivious acts committed by Epstein upon Jane Doe." (Compl. 
18.) Plaintiff cannot assert a cause of action for "violation of Chapter 800, Florida 
Statutes" because there is no private right of action under that Chapter. See 
generally Am. Home Assurance Co." Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So. 2d 360, 374 
(Fla. 2005) (observing that "not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy" 
(citing Villazonl. Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc., 843 So. 2d 842, 852 (Fla. 
2003)). See also, e.g., Miami Herald Publ'g Co. l. Ferre, 636 F. Supp. 970 (S.D. 
Fla. 1985) (King, 
(holding that violation of Florida's criminal extortion 
statute does not give rise to a civil cause of action for damages). 
2 Chapter 800, Florida Statutes, is entitled, "Lewdness; Indecent Exposure." 
3 
EFTA00175612

Case 9:08-cv-80 
-KAM 
Document 40 
Entered I 
'LSD Docket Of. 
/2008 
Page 4 of 8 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRAJJOHNSON 
Where a plaintiff brings a civil action pursuant to a criminal statute that 
provides no civil remedy, her complaint is properly dismissed for failure to state a 
cause of action. See Mantoothl. Richards, 557 So. 2d 646, 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 
1990) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of plaintiff's claim for parental kidnapping 
where "the mentioned statutes concern only criminal violations and do not afford 
a civil remedy") (citation omitted) (emphasis added). 
Even if Chapter 800 provided a civil remedy (which it does not) the statute 
does not apply to the plaintiff. The statute prohibits sexual activity with or lewd or 
lascivious offenses against "a person . . . less than 16 years of age." § 800.04, Fla. 
Stat. (2008) (emphasis added). 
By her own admission, the plaintiff was 
"approximately 16 years old." (Comp(. I 8.) (emphasis added). Plainly, the 
plaintiff falls outside of the scope of the statute's protection. Accordingly, the 
plaintiff's claim for sexual assault against Mr. Epstein, pursuant to a violation of 
Chapter 800, Florida Statutes, must be dismissed. 
Should the Court look beyond the plain language of the plaintiff's complaint 
and construe Count I as a claim for common-law assault, that claim would also 
fail. As the court explained in Lay" Kremer, 411 So. 2d 1347, 1349 (Fla. 1st 
DCA 1982), an assault is "an intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to 
another by force, or force unlawfully directed toward another under such 
circumstances as to create a fear of imminent peril, coupled with the apparent 
4 
EFTA00175613

Case 9:08-cv-8a 
-KAM 
Document 40 
Entered' 
LSD Docket OE 
/2008 
Page 5 of 8 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
present ability to effectuate the attempt." An assault thus requires "an affirmative 
act—a threat to use force, or the actual exertion of force." Sullivan, AIL Fed. 
Say. & Loan Assoc., 454 So. 2d 52, 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (affirming dismissal of 
assault claim where there was no affirmative act). 
In this case, there is no such affirmative act. The only thing that Mr. Epstein 
is alleged to have said to the plaintiff is "to take off her clothes" and "to give him a 
massage." (Compl. ¶ 12.) These allegations fall far short of an "offer of corporal 
injury by force." There are no allegations that Jane Doe was placed in any fear of 
imminent peril. See Gatto 's. Publix Supermarket, Inc., 387 So. 2d 377, 379 (Fla. 
3d DCA 1980) (holding that where there was no evidence to show that Gatto was 
placed in fear of imminent peril, there was no assault). In fact, the plaintiff does 
not even allege that Mr. Epstein touched her. Thus, there was no assault. 
Accordingly, because the plaintiff has failed to plead a cause of action for 
assault recognized in Florida, Count I against Mr. Epstein must be dismissed. 
Conclusion 
For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein respectfully 
requests that Count I of the plaintiff's complaint be dismissed. 
5 
EFTA00175614

Case 9:08-cv-80 
-KAM 
Document 40 
Entered I 
LSD Docket OS 
'2008 
Page 6 of 8 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
Respectfully submitted, 
LEWIS TEIN, P.L. 
3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 
Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 
Tel: 
Fax: 
By: /s/ Michael R. Thin 
GUY A. LEWIS 
MICHAEL R. TEIN 
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & 
WEISS, P.A. 
250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 
West Palm 
Palm 
Florida 33401 
Tel. 
Fax. 
By: 
Jack A. Goldberger
Fla. Bar No. 262013 
jgoldberger@agwpa.com 
BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTT1ER & 
COLEMAN, LLP 
515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 
West 
Florida 33401 
Tel. 
Fax. 
6 
EFTA00175615

Case 9:08-cv-80( 
•KAM 
Document 40 
Entered d 
LSD Docket Ofd 
'2008 
Page 7 of 8 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
By: Robert D. Critton, Esq. 
Fla. Bar No. 224162 
rcritton@bciclaw.com 
Michael J. Pike, Esq. 
Attorneys for Defendant Jetty Epstein 
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1 
Undersigned counsel has conferred in good faith with counsel for the 
plaintiff, who opposes the relief requested in this motion. 
/s/ Michael R. Tein 
Michael R. Tein 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September 4, 2008, I electronically filed the 
foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the 
foregoing document is being served this day on all individuals on the following 
service list via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF. 
/s/ Michael It Thin 
Michael R. Tein 
EFTA00175616

Case 9:08-cv-80( 
•KAM 
Document 40 
Entered d 
LSD Docket OR 
2008 
Page 8 of 8 
CASE NO.: 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
Service List 
Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. 
Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 
Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. 
Herman & Mennelstein, P.A. 
18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 
Miami Florida 33160 
Fax:
8 
EFTA00175617

Case 95118-cci-80i 
LKAM 
Document 56 
Entered c. 
LSD Docket 02. 
2009 
Page 1 of 8 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON 
JANE DOE NO. 2, 
Plaintiff, 
vs. 
JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 
Defendant. 
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 
Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey 
Epstein, as follows: 
Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue 
1. 
Jane Doe No. 2 is a citizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and is sui 
juris. 
2. 
This Complaint is brought under a fictitious name to protect the identity of the 
Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a 
minor. 
3. 
Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is a citizen and resident of the State of New York. 
4. 
This is an action for damages in excess of $50 million. 
5. 
This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 
§1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs; 
and (ii) is between citizens of different states. 
6. 
This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 
§1391(a) as a substantial 
part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. 
- I - 
EFTA00175618

. 
Case 9:08-6-80( 
-KAM 
Document 56 
Entered ci 
LSD Docket 02 
2009 
Page 2 of 8 
Factual Allegations 
7. 
At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 
• years old. Epstein is a financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to 
billionaires. He is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his 
principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. Thomas and Palm Beach, 
FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. 
8. 
Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for 
underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily 
economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave 
them money. In or about 2004-2005, Jane Doe, then approximately 16 years old, fell into Epstein's 
trap and became one of his victims. 
9. 
Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted 
girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. Thomas. 
10. 
Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. (Upon 
information and belief, the young girl who brought Jane Doe to Epstein was herself a minor victim 
of Epstein, and will therefore not be named in this Complaint). Under Epstein's plan, underage girls 
were recruited ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm 
Beach mansion. The recruiter would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm 
Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Epstein or someone on his behalf would direct 
the recruiter to bring one or more underage girls to the residence. The recruiter, upon information 
and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm 
Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - generally $200 to $300 per 
"massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have 
- 2 - 
EFTA00175619

Case 9:08-u-80 
-KAM 
Document 56 
Entered J
LSD Docket 02i 
2009 
Page 3 of 8 
credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of 
Epstein's plan. 
11. 
Epstein's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Upon arrival at 
Epstein's mansion, the underage victim would be introduced to 
Epstein's assistant, 
who gathered the girl's personal information, including her name and telephone number. Ms. 
would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition 
to othcr furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway hall and in the 
bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing 
only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl 
to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, 
including 
and 
the 
12. 
Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Jane Doe was recruited to give 
Epstcin a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm 
Beach. Once at the mansion, Jane was introduced to 
who led her up the flight of 
stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Epstein told Jane to take off her clothes and 
give him a massage. Jane kept her panties and bra on and complied with Epstein's instructions. 
Epstein wore only a towel around his waste. After a short period of time, Epstein removed the towel 
and rolled over. 
Epstein began to masturbate and he sexually assaulted Jane. 
13. 
After Epstein had completed the assault, Jane was then able to get dressed, leave the 
room and go back down the stairs. Jane was paid $200 by Epstein. The young girl who recruited 
Jane was paid $100 by Epstein for bringing Jane to him. 
14. 
As a result of this encounter with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, 
humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. 
- 3 - 
EFTA00175620

. 
Case 9:08-j-80 
-KAM 
Document 56 
Entered 
I
 
LSD Docket 02, 
2009 
Page 4 of 8 
COUNT I 
Sexual Assault and Battery 
15. 
Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 14 above. 
16. 
Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent 
apprehension of such a contact, and Jane Doe was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. 
17. 
Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane 
Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. 
18. 
Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, 
with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. 
19. 
Epstein tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts 
were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. 
20. 
Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were 
done willfully and maliciously. 
21. 
As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and 
will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and 
emotional damages. 
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey 
Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this 
Court deems just and proper. 
COUNT H 
Intentiimal Infliction of Emotional Distress 
22. 
Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 14 above. 
23. 
Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. 
24. 
Epstein's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds 
- 4 - 
EFTA00175621

. 
Case 9118-6-80 
.KAM 
Document 56 
Entered 
LSD Docket 02/ 
2009 
Page 5 of 8 
of decency. 
25. 
Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted 
in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or 
emotional health to be significantly impaired. 
26. 
Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doc. Epstein knew or had 
reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and 
damage to Jane Doe, or Epstein acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing 
severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. 
27. 
As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane 
Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. 
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey 
Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages, and such other and further relief as this 
Court deems just and proper. 
COUNT III 
Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 I. 
$2422 
28. 
Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 14 above. 
29. 
Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, 
induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or 
sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. 
30. 
On June 30, 2008, Epstein entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida §§ 796.07 
and 796.03, in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case nos. 2008-cf-
009381AXXXMB and 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB), for conduct involving the same plan and 
scheme as alleged herein. 
31. 
As to PlaintiffJane Doe, Epstein could have been charged with criminal violations of 
- 5 - 
EFTA00175622

Case 9:08-cv-80 
KAM 
Document 56 
Entered I  
LSD Docket 02, 
2009 
Page 6 of 8 
Florida Statute §796.07(2) (including subsections 
(d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) thereof), and other 
criminal offenses including violations of Florida Statutes §§798.02 and 800.04 (including 
subsections (5), (6) and (7) thereof). 
32. 
Epstein's acts and conduct are in violation of 181= §2422. 
33. 
As a result of Epstein's violation of 181= §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal 
injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. 
34. 
Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a 
reasonable attorneys' fee. 
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey 
Epstein for all damages available under 18 ill 
§2255(a), including without limitation, actual 
and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as 
this Court deems just and proper. 
JURY TRIAL DEMAND 
Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. 
Dated: February 27, 2008 
Respectfully submitted, 
By: 
s/ Adam D. Horowitz 
Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) 
ssmasexabuseattomev.com 
6980) 
MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. 
Attorneys for Plaintiff 
18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 
Miami- 
60 
Tel: 
Fax: 
- 6 - 
EFTA00175623

Case 9:08-cV-80( 
•KAM 
Document 56 
Entered 
LSD Docket 02/ 
2009 
Page 7 of 8 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I hereby certify that on February 27, 2009,1 electronically filed the foregoing document with 
the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this 
day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of 
Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those 
parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. 
/s/ Adam D. Horowitz 
- 7 - 
EFTA00175624

Case 9:08-cv-80' 
KAM 
Document 56 
Entered q 
LSD Docket 02/ 
?009 
Page 8 of 8 
SERVICE LIST 
DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN 
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON 
United States District Court, Southern District of Florida 
Jack Alan Goldber cr Esq. 
Robert D. Critton. Esq. 
Is/ Adam D. Horowitz 
- 8 - 
EFTA00175625

Case 9:08-cv 
119-KAM 
Document 69 
Enter 
in FLSD Docket 
D2/2009 
Page 1 of 7 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON 
JANE DOE NO. 2 
I 
JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 
Plaintiff, 
Defendant. 
DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE 
DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 
Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his 
undersigned attorneys, files his Answer to the Second Amended Complaint and states: 
1. Without knowledge and deny. 
2. As to the allegations in paragraphs 2, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment 
privilege against self-Incrimination. See DeLisi I Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 
1099 (Fla. 41b DCA 1983)• Malloy I 
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 - "Mt 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 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 
EFTA00175626

' 
Case 9:08-cv 
119-KAM 
Document 69 
Enter( 
n FLSD Docket; 
32/2009 
Page 2 of 7 
Jane Doe No. 2 i Epstein 
Page 2 
the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute 
the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff 
bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. 
3. As to the allegations In paragraph 3, deny. 
4. As to the allegations in paragraph 4, deny. 
5. As to the allegations in paragraph 5, without knowledge and deny. 
6. As to the allegations in paragraphs 6, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment 
privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi I. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 
1099 (Fla. 41h DCA 1983); Malloy I 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 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 
the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute 
the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff 
bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. 
7. As to the allegations in paragraphs 7 through 14 of Plaintiff's Second Amended 
Complaint, Defendant exercises his Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-
EFTA00175627

Case 9:08-cv 
119-KAM 
Document 69 
Enter( 
n FLSD Docket 
02/2009 
Page 3 of 7 
Jane Doe No. 2 J  Epstein 
Page 3 
incrimination. See DeLisi I Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 
1983); Malloy J 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 - "[fit 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 privilege as equivalent to a specific 
denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2c1 Evidence §592. Defendants In civil actions. —"... a civil 
defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the 
privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the 
kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing 
a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. 
8. 
In response to the allegations of paragraph 15, Defendant realleges and adopts 
his responses to paragraphs 1 through 14 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth 
in paragraphs 1 through 6 above herein. 
9. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-Incrimination to 
the allegations set forth In paragraphs 16 through 21 of the Second Amended 
Complaint See DeLisi 
Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); 
Malloy J. 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 - "[fit would be incongruous to have different standards determine the 
EFTA00175628