Stanley Pottinger
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
Lifestyles Convention
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
AUSA-1
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Stan Johnson Company (Broker)
|
Family |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
David Boies
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Lifestyles Convention
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-20 | N/A | Filing of Notice of Motion for Leave to Proceed Anonymously | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2019-08-14 | N/A | Filing of Civil Cover Sheet for Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN-DCF | SDNY | View |
| 2018-01-01 | Meeting | Meetings took place between attorneys for accusing witnesses and SDNY prosecutors concerning or r... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2016-01-01 | Meeting | Meetings took place where certain attorneys for accusing witnesses met with SDNY prosecutors to a... | Southern District of New York | View |
051.pdf
This document is a letter dated January 10, 2020, from attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Magistrate Judge Debra C. Freeman regarding five specific cases involving 'Doe' plaintiffs against Darren K. Indyke and other Epstein-related entities. Edwards informs the court that while discussions with the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program are productive, his clients do not wish to stay their lawsuits. The letter also outlines an agreed-upon discovery schedule with the Estate's counsel, Mr. Moskowitz.
044.pdf
This document is a letter from Bradley J. Edwards (Edwards Pottinger LLC), attorney for Plaintiff VE, to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street (1:19-cv-07625). The letter requests an extension of time to file an Opposition to the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, moving the deadline from December 13, 2019, to December 18, 2019. The document includes Judge Nathan's handwritten 'SO ORDERED' endorsement dated December 18, 2019.
043.pdf
This document is a letter from attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated December 13, 2019, regarding the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al. Edwards requests a five-day extension (until December 18, 2019) to file the Plaintiff's Opposition to the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. The letter notes that the Defendants have been conferred with and have no objection to the extension.
041.pdf
This document is a letter filed on December 9, 2019, by attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street (1:19-cv-07625). The letter informs the court that the Plaintiff (VE) will not file an amended pleading in response to the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss filed in November 2019, but will instead defend the existing First Amended Complaint. The document establishes the legal representation of the plaintiff by Edwards Pottinger LLC in this civil action against an Epstein-related entity.
028.pdf
This document is a letter from attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al., dated November 12, 2019. Edwards opposes the Defendants' request for a two-week extension to respond to the complaint, arguing that they have already been granted a 45-day extension and that the upcoming Rule 26(f) conference should proceed. The letter notes that the Defendants' delay is related to a filing in the U.S. Virgin Islands regarding a 'claims resolution program' for the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, which the Plaintiff argues should not halt the current litigation.
024.pdf
This document is a legal letter filed on October 16, 2019, by attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It concerns the case 'VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al.' and serves to alert the court to a recent decision in a related Epstein case (Katlyn Doe v. Indyke) where Judge Castel allowed a plaintiff to proceed anonymously, supporting Edwards' client's similar motion.
023.pdf
This document is a civil summons filed on September 26, 2019, in the Southern District of New York for Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN. The plaintiff, identified as 'VE', is suing several entities including Nine East 71st Street Corporation and Financial Trust Company, Inc., as well as Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn in their capacities as Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein. The document requires the defendants to serve an answer to the complaint within 21 days to the plaintiff's attorney, J. Stanley Pottinger.
022.pdf
This document is a Summons in a Civil Action filed on September 25, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff, identified as 'VE', is suing several entities including Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., NES, LLC, and the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate (Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn). The summons instructs the defendants to respond to the complaint within 21 days.
017.pdf
This document is a Summons in a Civil Action issued on September 10, 2019, by the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff, identified as 'VE', is suing several entities and individuals associated with the Epstein estate, including Nine East 71st Street Corp, Financial Trust Company Inc., NES LLC, Darren K. Indyke, and Richard D. Kahn. This specific summons is addressed to Financial Trust Company, Inc. in the US Virgin Islands.
015.pdf
This document is a Summons in a Civil Action filed on September 9, 2019, in the Southern District of New York (Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN). The plaintiff, identified as 'VE', is suing several Epstein-related entities (Nine East 71st Street Corp, Financial Trust Company, NES LLC) and individuals Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn. This specific summons is addressed to NES, LLC in St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands.
013.pdf
This document is a Summons in a Civil Action (Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN) filed on September 9, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff 'VE' is suing multiple defendants including Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., NES, LLC, Darren K. Indyke, and Richard D. Kahn. The summons is specifically directed to Nine East 71st Street Corporation, care of Darren K. Indyke.
012.pdf
This document is a Summons in a Civil Action filed on September 6, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff, identified only as 'VE', is suing three Epstein-related corporate entities: Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., and NES, LLC. The summons is directed to Darren K. Indyke, a known lawyer for Jeffrey Epstein, acting as the agent for these corporations.
011.pdf
This document is a Summons in a Civil Action filed on September 6, 2019, in the Southern District of New York (Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN). The plaintiff, identified as 'VE', is suing several Epstein-related entities: Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., and NES, LLC. The summons is specifically addressed to NES, LLC at an address in St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands, instructing them to respond to the complaint represented by attorney J. Stanley Pottinger.
010.pdf
This document is a Summons in a Civil Action filed on September 6, 2019, in the Southern District of New York (Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN). The plaintiff, identified as 'VE', is suing Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., and NES, LLC. The summons is specifically addressed to Financial Trust Company, Inc. in St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands, instructing them to respond to the complaint represented by attorney J. Stanley Pottinger.
004.pdf
This document is a Notice of Motion filed on August 20, 2019, in the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:19-cv-07625-AJN). The plaintiff, identified only as 'VE', is requesting permission to proceed anonymously in a lawsuit against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and associated entities. The defendants include Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn as representatives of the estate, as well as Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., and NES, LLC.
002.pdf
This is a Civil Cover Sheet filed on August 14, 2019, in the Southern District of New York for a lawsuit alleging negligence. The plaintiff, identified only as 'VE', is represented by J. Stanley Pottinger and is suing three entities associated with Jeffrey Epstein: Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., and NES, LLC. The document establishes diversity jurisdiction.
EFTA00029251.pdf
This document is an email dated December 1, 2019, forwarding a New York Times article titled 'Jeffrey Epstein, Blackmail and a Lucrative Hot List'. The article summary mentions a hacker claiming to possess Epstein's sex tapes and lawyers speculating on the payment potential for keeping them secret. The URL suggests the involvement of David Boies and Pottinger.
EFTA00020442.pdf
This document is an email dated December 1, 2019, sent between employees of the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS). The email forwards a New York Times article titled 'Jeffrey Epstein, Blackmail and a Lucrative ‘Hot List’,' which discusses David Boies and potential blackmail videos. The sender apologizes for likely duplicating previous notifications about the article.
EFTA00011418.pdf
This document is a discovery request letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's defense counsel, Cohen & Gresser LLP, to the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, dated October 13, 2020. The defense requests a wide range of materials including exculpatory Brady evidence, information on Minor Victims 1-3, communications regarding Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement, and records of coordination between the government and civil attorneys representing Epstein's accusers. The letter also requests specific FBI files, unredacted reports, and evidence related to the credibility and potential financial motives of government witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00003025.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 16, 2021, recounts events from 2016 concerning the civil litigation between Giuffre and Maxwell. It details the process of establishing a protective order for discovery materials, initiated by Maxwell's motion on March 2, 2016, contested by Giuffre's counsel (Boies Schiller), and ultimately entered by Judge Robert W. Sweet on March 18, 2016. The document also asserts that the USAO-SDNY did not open an investigation into Epstein or Maxwell in 2016 and that the government has no record of email communication between AUSA-1 and Boies Schiller attorneys after May 3, 2016.
DOJ-OGR-00003024.jpg
This legal document describes a February 2016 meeting where attorneys presented information to an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA-1) about individuals connected to Epstein, with a focus on Maxwell. It asserts that because this meeting pre-dated the depositions central to the current indictment, the attorneys could not have alleged perjury related to those specific depositions at that time. The document also notes AUSA-1's lack of recall regarding specific perjury discussions involving Maxwell and details the government's subsequent review of AUSA-1's emails for related communications.
DOJ-OGR-00002725.jpg
This legal document, filed on February 4, 2021, is a request for the production of documents related to defense motions in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It seeks all communications concerning the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Jeffrey Epstein, including those between various government agencies and Epstein's lawyers. The request also demands communications from meetings in 2016 and 2018 where attorneys for Epstein's victims urged the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) to launch a criminal investigation into both Epstein and Maxwell.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019297.jpg
A legal letter dated February 7, 2018, from the law firm Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP, representing intervenor Alan Dershowitz in the Giuffre v. Maxwell case. The letter is addressed to attorneys J. Stanley Pottinger, Paul G. Cassell, Sigrid S. McCawley, and Laura A. Menninger. The correspondence begins an allegation that the plaintiff's counsel improperly leaked submissions from a pending disciplinary proceeding to the Washington Post.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025382.jpg
This document is a forensic log of a message thread from September 9, 2018, involving the email alias 'jeeitunes@gmail.com' (associated with Jeffrey Epstein) and a redacted individual. The conversation discusses a person named 'Pottinger' and his brother 'Stan,' disparaging the family as 'rats' and 'rotten.' The dialogue connects Pottinger to prominent lawyer David Boies, referring to him as a partner.
Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 15 Civ. 7433 (S.D.N.Y.)
Complaint regarding plaintiff's counsel allegedly providing Washington Post reporters with submissions from a pending disciplinary proceeding.
No Subject
An email dated May 3, 2016, from Pottinger to AUSA-1, which appears to suggest they spoke by telephone the previous day.
No Subject
A potential telephone conversation on or about May 2, 2016, suggested by an email from Pottinger.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity