UN I TE ST AT ES I STR I CT OU RT SOUTHERN DI STRI CT OF ORI DA NO CI V-MARRA/J OHNSON Plaintiff EFF REY EPSTEI and SARAH KEL EN OR DE A ND OP IN ION Plaintiff?s Complaint DE filed May The motion is now fully briefe and ripe for re vie Th Cou rt ha a re fu lly re vie we th mot ion a me nd sp on se a nd re ply a nd is Bac kgr ound On Marc Plaintiff filed her Complaint ag ainst Defe ndants eff rey Epstein and Sarah ellen alleg ing a violation of U.S.C DE The acts a alleg ed in the Com pla int a re a oll ow During the eve nts giving rise to this claim Plainti ff wa a minor but has now re ache majority Compl Defe ndant Epstein has a history of enticing oung women who a re minors and soliciting them to eng ag in prostitution for his own sexual gra tification Compl Epstein conspired ith two persons he mploy ed for this purpose Hale Robson and Def endant Sar ah Ke llen and other to solicit oung women of the ty pe Epstein pre fer red Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of blonde attra ctive in appe ara nce a nd oung er tha ear of ag to provide se ual ratifica tion for him by eng ag ing in a cts of prostitution Com pl Def endants Epstein a nd Kellen ntere int a ri min a on sp ir a to oli it ou ng wo me or a ts ro sti tut ion in lud ing Pla int if in Palm Bea ch County Compl Fr om about une until about Fe bruar Def endants pe rsuade induced or enticed Plaintiff to come to Epstein?s home and pr ovide Epstein with massag es The ma ssa sc a la te in to xua nc ou nte rs be tw ps te in a nd Pla int if sig ne to fu lf ill his unnatura sex ual desire for oung women or ven oung er irls who wer minors Compl These a cts included Epstein?s equest that he wanted the encounte to be like a porn vide Compl Epstein would script lines for Plaintiff to say including alling out his name and re qu sti ng tha he pe rf or a rt a in xua a ha rd wh ile he tou he Pl a int if a ina wi th a vibra tor or with his fing ers alter natively he would masturba te in the pre sence of Plaintiff afte demanding her to disrobe and wa lk in from of him in provocative se ual poses Compl Epstein would pay Plaintiff a fe of on ach oc casion a fter he ejac ulated while masturba ting in the prese nce of Plaintiff Compl Epstein touche Plaintiff?s vag ina or pe netra ted Plaintiff?s vag ina using his finge rs and/or a vibrator on multiple occa sions during the time that Plaintiff was a minor ausing persona injury to her Compl I violation of U.S.C Def endants knowing ly persua ded induce or entice Plaintiff to eng ag in ac ts of prostitution when Plainti ff wa under the a of Plaintiff an document the ollowing da tes when the acts re curr ed base on pay ments rec eived and ompl I a dd iti on Pl a int if lie ve th a th re we re a ma ny a to oth a sio ns du ri ng thi Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of time frame that Epstein solicited and proc ured he to perf orm prostitution services all during the time that she was a minor Compl Ep ste in a ma de a a re me nt ith the Un ite St a te A tto rn Of fi to ot on te st liability for laims broug ht exclusi vely pursuant to U.S.C in ex chang for avoiding fede ral prose cution under S.C which provides a sentenc of ear for ach violation of the law Compl Def endant a rg ues in his motion hat the ca se should be dismissed beca use Plaintiff previously filed a ase in state ourt based on the same set of fac ts as in this case Plaintiff can se ek dama es under U.S.C of a minimum of per victim Plaintiff has failed to a lleg a violation of the requisite pre dicate a ct as identified in U.S.C and Plaintiff has failed to state a ca use of a ction for onspiracy to violate U.S.C Plaintiff responds that the Court should deny the motion because she is entitled to pursue se pa ra te sta te a nd fe de ra la ims in he ir re sp tiv ou rt the da ma is su a re no a pp ro pr ia te for a motion to di smiss and the pleading at issue provide De fenda nt with sufficient notice of the un de rl ing fa tua ba se or the la ims Stand ard of Review I deciding a motion to dism iss pursuant to Fede ral Rule of Civil Procedure a ou rt mus a pt a ll a tua a lle a tio ns in a omp la int a tr ue a nd ta ke the in the lig ht os favor able to the plaintiff See Erickson Pardus S.Ct To satisfy the pleading require ments of Fe dera Rule of Civil Procedur a omplaint must contain a shor and pla in ta te me nt ho wi ng a nti tle me nt lie a nd the sta te me nt us ive the de fe nd a nt a ir notice of hat the plaintiff claim is and the rounds upon which it re sts Swierkiewic Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Sorema N.A U.S iting ed Civ see also Be ll Atlantic Corp Twombly S.Ct Dura Pharm I nc roudo U.S Th is i a lib ra pl a din re qu ir me nt on tha do ot qu ir a pla int if le a ith particula rity ever element of a ca use of a ction Roe Awa re Woman Ctr for Choice I nc F.3d 11th Cir I nstead the omplaint need only conta in either dire ct or infere ntial alleg ations respe cting all the mater ial elements ne cessa ry to sustain a rec overy under some viable leg al theory I interna citation and quotation omitted A omplaint need not specify in detail the pre cise theor iving ise to rec overy All that is required is that the de fe nd a nt on no tic a to the la im ing a sse rt a a ins hi a nd the ro un ds on wh ic it rests Sams United ood and Comml Worker I ntl Union 2d 11th Cir While a complaint attac ked by a Rule motion to dismi ss does not need de tailed fac tual alleg ations a plaintiff obliga tion to provide the rounds of his entitlement to relief re qu ir mo re tha la be ls a nd on lus ion a nd a fo rm ula ic re ita tio he le me nts of a a us of ac tion will not do ell Atlantic Corp Twombly S.Ct at itations omi tted actua alleg ations must be enoug to raise a rig ht to relief a bove the spe culative leve on the assumption that all of the complaint alleg ations are true I at Plaintiff must plead enoug fac ts to state a plausible basis for the claim I Discussion First De fenda nt arg ues in his motion hat this case should be dismiss ed bec ause Plaintiff previously filed a ase in state ourt based on the same set of fac ts as in this case Plaintiff filed the instant case alleg ing violations of U.S.C and filed the state ca se alleg ing se ual Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of battery and civil conspira cy Def endant a rg ues that the state ourt would have concur rent jur isd ic tio ve la int if la im a nd tha xce pti on a ir ums ta nc xist requiring dismiss al of the eder al ac tion in favor of the first filed state a ction See Amer ican Ba nkers I ns Co of Florida irst State I ns Co F.2d Cir th The ceptional ircumstance test is set forth in Moses Cone Memorial Hosp Merc ury Constr U.S As the Eleve nth Circuit ex plained in Amer ican anker I ns a I Co lo a Ri Wa te Co is it St a te the Sup re me Cou rt a nn ou nc th a a fe de ra ou rt ma dis mis a a tio a us of pa ra lle st a te ou rt lit ig a tio nly un de xce pti on a ir ums ta nc at I ndeed nly the clea rest of justifica tions will war rant dismissal I at The Court set out four actor to be consider ed in deter mining whe ther dismiss al on the rounds of ceptional ircumstance is appropriate whe ther one of the courts has a ssumed jurisdiction over prope rty the inconve nience of the fe de ra or um he po te nti a or pie me a li tig a tio a nd he or de i which the orums obtained jurisdiction I at I Moses Cone the Court rea ffirme its view that only exceptional circ umstances will war rant dismissal of fede ral ases in fa vor of a concur rent state suit U.S at The Mose Cone dec ision also repea ted the four Colorado River fa ctors and a dded two more he the ta te or fe de ra la ill be a pp lie a nd he a de qu a of the sta te court to protec the parties rig hts Moses Cone U.S at Noonan Sou th I nc Co un ty of Vo lus ia 1th Cir he te st for de termining when ceptional ircumstance exi st theref ore involves the car eful ba lancing of six fac tors The we ight to be iven any one fa ctor may vary re a tly de pe nd ing on the a se ho we ve the ba la nc is he a vil we ig hte in favor of the fe dera court exercising jurisdiction I at Her the irst fac tor is inapplicable be cause neither the fede ral ourt nor the state court has assumed jurisdiction over any proper ty The sec ond fac tor the inconve nience of the fe dera forum foc uses primarily on the phy sical proximi ty of the fe dera forum to the evidenc and witnesses A merica Ba nkers I ns F.2d a quoting Eva nston I nsuranc Co imco I nc 2d 5th Cir This fac tor does not weig in favor of dismiss al of the Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of at rt ro ce ed i Th fo us of the thi rd fa tor is a vo idi ng pie me a li tig a tio Pla int if a ro ug ht la ims under eder al law in the eder al cour action and unde state law in the state cour action The fac that the state cour may have oncurr ent jurisdiction over a U.S.C claim and the fac that Plainti ff ould have hosen to bring her S.C claim as part of he state ourt a tio ot re lud he ro ili ng a la im i de ra ou rt A lth ou ma ny of the sa me fa ts are involved in both cases Plaintiff has br oug ht differ ent ca uses of a ction in eac forum and ha not broug ht any fede ral laims in her state ourt ca se litigating case involving many of the same fa cts simultaneously in both feder al and state court Plaintiff risks the potential applica tion of re ju dic ata principles to claims in the for um which is the last to decide the case See Jang United Tec hnologie Corp F.3d Cir plaintiff may not split cause of th action to bring state cla ims in one suit and then file a sec ond suit with federa cause of ac tion Aquather I ndustries I nc lorida Power ight Co 3d Cir holding th that a eder al anham Ac claim was ba rre in fede ral ourt afte the plaintiff lected to br ing on ly its sta te la la ims in he ini tia st a te ou rt lit ig a tio he re bo th ta te a nd fe de ra la ims relied upon the same ssential fac ts Montana United States U.S explaining that the pur pose of the doc trine is to protect a adver se par ty fr om the expense and vexation attending multiple lawsuits and conserve judicial resourc es The pre sence of that ri sk hic Pl a int if a a pp a re ntl ho se to ta ke oe ot re lud Pla int if ro pr oc din in both fora on the separ ate laims Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of The four th fac tor the orde in which jurisdiction was obtaine should not be mea sured exclusively by which complaint wa filed first but rathe in terms of how muc prog ress ha been ma de in the two ac tions America Ba nkers I ns F.2d a quoting Moses Cone U.S at Her the state action wa filed first and efe ndant Epstein has re sponded to the complaint in both cases Eve assuming tha the state cour liti ation has prog resse further than the fe dera liti ation this factor doe not weig heavily in favor of dismiss al consider ing the overa ll analy sis of the other ive fa ctors The fif th fac tor whethe fe dera or state law ill be applied does not point toward dismiss al as the eder al ca se ra ises only fede ral auses of action inally the six th fac tor the a de qu a of the sta te ou rt to ro te th pa rt ie ri hts is in qu ipo ise he re is a so to defe to the state ourt pursuant to this fac tor A eder al cour cannot prope rly decline to erc ise its statutory jurisdiction however sim ply be a us jud ic ia on omy mig ht se rv de fe rr ing to a sta te ou rt de ra ou rt have a virtually unflag ing oblig ation to exercise the jurisdiction given the Amer ican a nk rs I ns a uo tin Col or a do Riv Wa te on se rv ist nit St a te U.S This is espec ially true he re be cause this case a sserts a eder al ca use of action and the state ca se does not De fenda nt has failed to de monstrate that ceptional circ umstances require dismiss al of this case in defe renc to the pending state cour proce eding Americ an anker I ns F.2d a Def endant a lso contends that Plaintiff has fa iled to sufficiently alleg a violation of the requisite pre dicate a ct as identified in U.S.C The Complaint alleg es a violation of U.S.C which is one of the statutes listed in as a basis for liability under tha Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of De fe nd a nt a lso on te nd th a a a lle ic tim of a vio la tio is only entitled to one awa rd of the sta tutory minimum amount of dama es re ardle ss of the nu mbe i nc ide nts or a ts ha to ok pla wh ic on sti tut iol a tio ns of the a a us Pla int if a nly a sse rt ne a us of a tio in he omp la int it is ot ssa ry to ide thi question at the pre sent time beca use the issue is one of damag es and not whe ther a cause of a tio a ta te Th Cou rt wi ll se rv ru lin on thi ue sti on a nd de ide it he it is pr se nte in a mor a pp ro pr ia te on te xt ei the i th is a se or in a ny of the re la te a se sta tut Se S.C a Se tio sta te a oll ow ev er i ai a fa ci i ea i er at re i gn commerc or ithin the special maritime and te rritorial jurisdiction of the United States knowing ly persua des induce entices or coer ces a ny individual who has not attained the a of ear to eng ag in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person an be harg ed with a riminal offe nse or a ttempts to do so shall be fined unde this titl and imprisoned not less than ear or for life The Complaint sufficiently alleg es that De fenda nt Epstein knowingly persua ded induce or enticed Plaintiff to eng ag in ac ts of prostitution when Plainti ff wa under the a of Comp Howe ver the Complaint does not allege that Def endant use the mail or any fac ility or mea ns of interstate or fore ign ommerce Plaintiff asserts in her response that the te le ph on sy ste is le a rl a fa ili ty of int rs ta te omm rc a nd sta te th a sh is re pa re to alleg that De fenda nts Epstein and Kellen use an instrumentality of interstate commerc namely Kellen cellular te lephone to solicit Plainti ff Plaintiff shall be pe rmitted to amend her complaint acc ording ly a stl ps te in a sse rt th a Pla int if a a ile to sta te a a us of a tio or on sp ir a to vio la te S.C or the sa me re a so he fa ile to sta te a a us of a tio nd ag ainst Epstein individually As explained su pr a Plaintiff shall be permitted to amend her omplaint to allege that Def endant use the mail or any fac ility or mea ns of interstate or fore ign ommerce to violate Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of a i i i OR DE RE A ND AD JU DG ED a oll ow fe nd a nt Je ff re Ep ste in Mo tio to Di smi ss la int if Co mpl a int is RA NT ED IN AR A ND DE NI ED IN AR as fo llo ws Pla int if la im i ism iss ith ou pr jud ic to a me nd to a lle tha fe nd a nt used the mail or a ny fac ility or mea ns of interstate or fore ign ommerce to violate U.S.C Ex cept a to the question of whethe Plaintiff is limi ted to one aw ard of statutory damag es on which the Court reser ves ruling the re mainder of Def endant Motion is denied DO NE AN RD ER ED i a a a a a a Florida this day of Aug ust th Copies furnished to a ll ou ns of re or KE TD NN Un TD i ed at es Di ri ct ge Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of
15,005 characters
