• IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ss CASE NO.: 502009CA040800 AG Plaintiff(s), -ow . re, a' • Tr 5 vs. n'xT, t • --n. - SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, etc., et al., Defendant(s). I cIncck -•o ' S ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPledyTc. CY. AP4, THIS CAUSE came before 'the Court upon the Defendant, lifigElLEY 0 Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaini served August 23, 2011. The Court reviewed the Second Amended Complaint, the Defendant's Motion, the Plaintiff's Response, and other Memorandums filed both in support and opposition to the Motion. The Court has also reviewed the various authorities cited by the parties. Based upon review of the above, as well as being otherwise fully advised in the in premises, it is CONSIDERED, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: It is well established upon Motion to Dismiss that this Court is limited to a review of the four corners of the Complaint and the well pled allegations therein. A Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a cause of action admits the well pled facts in the Complaint and reasonable inferences therefrom and the allegations must be construed in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff. Applying this standard to the four corners of the Complaint filed by the Plaintiff, the Court finds that the allegations are sufficient to plead a cause of • action for "abuse of process" against the Defendant The overwhelming majority of the Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and Supplemental Motion to Dismiss deal with the truthfulness of the allegations against the Defendant, affirmative defenses that may be available to the Defendant, as well as the references outside the four corners EFTA02770114