← EFTA02740529Court RecordsEFTA02740538 →

EFTA02740531

Court Records

Extracted Text #

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/04/2008 Page 1 of 7 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-MARRA/ 
JANE DOE NO. 4, 
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 v. Bd. of Trustees of Univ. of W. Fla., No. 
3:07cv30/RV/EMT, 2007 WL 2020161, * 2 (N.D. 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 v. Univ. of Rochester Med. Ctr., 180 F.R.D. 247, 
249 (W.D.N.Y. 1998) (concluding "that the filing of a motion that only addresses part of a 
complaint suspends the time to respond to the entire complaint, not just to the claims that are the 
subject of the motion"); v. Berry College, Inc., No. Civ.A. 4:96CV338-HLM, 1997 WL 
579166, *1 (N.D. Ga. July 3, 1997) (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"). 
EFTA02740531

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/04/2008 Page 2 of 7 
CASE NO.: 08-80380-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 v. DirectTV, Inc., 450 F.3d 1314, 
1320 (1 1 th Cir. 2006) (quoting Roe v. 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. v. 
Marshal County Gas Dist, 992 F.2d 1171, 1174 (11th Cir. 1993). "[T]o survive a 
2 
EFTA02740532

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/04/2008 Page 3 of 7 
CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-MARRA/ 
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 v. Crist, No. 06-14617, 2007 WL 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 Statutesi2 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. v. Plaza Materials Corp., 908 So. 2d 360, 374 
(Fla. 2005) (observing that "not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy") 
(citing Villazon v. Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc., 843 So. 2d 842, 852 (Fla. 
2003)). See also, e.g., Miami Herald Publ'g Co. v. Ferre, 636 F. Supp. 970 (S.D. 
Fla. 1985) ( C.J.) (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 
EFTA02740533

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/04/2008 Page 4 of 7 
CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-MARRA/I 
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 Mantooth v. 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). 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 v. 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 
present ability to effectuate the attempt." An assault thus requires "an affirmative 
act—a threat to use force, or the actual exertion of force." v. Ad. 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 Jane Doe is to "remove her clothes and give him a 
4 
EFTA02740534

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/04/2008 Page 5 of 7 
CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-MARRAJJOHNSON 
massage." (Compl. 1 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. Gatto v. 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). 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. 
Respectfully submitted, 
TEIN, P.L. 
3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 
Coconut Grove, Florida 33133 
Tel: [Phone Redacted] 
Fax: [Phone Redacted] 
By: Is/ Michael R. Tein 
GUY A. 
Fla. Bar No. 623740 
MICHAEL R. TEIN 
Fla. Bar No. 993522 
[Email Redacted] 
5 
EFTA02740535

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/04/2008 Page 6 of 7 
CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-MARRA/ 
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & 
WEISS, P.A. 
250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 
Tel. [Phone Redacted] 
Fax. [Phone Redacted] 
By: Jack A. Goldberger 
Fla. Bar No. 262013 
jgoldberger®agwpa.com 
BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & 
COLEMAN, LLP 
515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 
Tel. [Phone Redacted] 
Fax. [Phone Redacted] 
By: Robert D. Critton, Esq. 
Fla. Bar No. 224162 
[Email Redacted] 
Michael J. Pike, Esq. 
Fla. Bar No. 617296 
[Email Redacted] 
Attorneys for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein 
6 
EFTA02740536

Case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/04/2008 Page 7 of 7 
CASE NO.: 08-80380-CIV-MARRA/ 
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 R. Tein 
Michael R. Tein 
Service List 
Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. 
Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 
Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. 
Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 
18205 Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2218 
Miami, Florida 33160 
Fax: [Phone Redacted] 
7 
EFTA02740537
← EFTA02740529Court RecordsEFTA02740538 →