Trove
Sign In Sign Up

RICHARD D. KAHN

Person
Mentions
542
Relationships
46
Events
73
Documents
271
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.

Event Timeline

Interactive Timeline: Hover over events to see details. Events are arranged chronologically and alternate between top and bottom for better visibility.
46 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
Executor
78 Very Strong
74
View
person JEFFREY EDWARD EPSTEIN
Executor
49 Very Strong
49
View
person JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
Executor of estate
22 Very Strong
22
View
person Bennet J. Moskowitz
Client
19 Very Strong
19
View
person Bennet J. Moskowitz
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
13
View
person JEFFREY EDWARD EPSTEIN
Executor of estate
8 Strong
8
View
person Jeffrey Epstein
Executor
8 Strong
8
View
person JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
Executor representative
7
7
View
person Jeffrey Epstein
Executor of estate
6
2
View
person JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
Executor deceased
5
5
View
person Darren K. Indyke
Co executors
5
5
View
person Mary S. Dirago
Client
4
4
View
person Darren K. Indyke
Co defendants
4
4
View
organization Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein
Executor
3
3
View
person Maria Farmer
Legal representative
3
3
View
person Mary "Molly" S. Dirago
Client
2
2
View
person Charles L. Glover
Client
2
2
View
person Mary S. Dirago
Legal representative
2
2
View
person Teresa Helm
Legal representative
2
2
View
person JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
Estate executor
2
2
View
person Valerie Sirota
Client
2
2
View
person Darren K. Indyke
Professional
2
2
View
person Charles L. Glover
Legal representative
2
2
View
person JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
Business associate
2
2
View
person JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
Executor administrator
1
1
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
2020-05-12 N/A Notice of Appearance filed by Charles L. Glover New York, New York View
2020-05-08 N/A Notice of Appearance filed by Matthew J. Aaronson New York, New York View
2020-05-08 N/A Filing of Notice of Appearance by Valerie Sirota New York, New York View
2020-04-30 N/A Entry of Opinion & Order by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in Jane Doe 15 case. New York, NY View
2020-04-30 N/A Filing of Opinion & Order dismissing punitive damages claim in Jane Doe 15 v. Indyke. Southern District of New York View
2020-04-28 N/A Entry of Opinion & Order by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in Mary Doe v. Indyke et al. New York, NY View
2020-04-28 N/A Opinion issued in related case Mary Doe v. Indyke and Kahn. Southern District of New York View
2020-04-16 N/A Defendants served responses and objections to Plaintiff's discovery requests. N/A View
2020-04-14 N/A Filing of Defendants' Notice of Motion to Dismiss New York, New York View
2020-04-13 N/A Deadline for Defendants to file reply USDC SDNY View
2020-03-27 N/A Filing of Answer and Affirmative Defenses New York, NY View
2020-03-17 N/A Summons filed in Civil Action Case 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF Southern District of New York View
2020-03-17 N/A Summons filed in the US District Court Southern District of New York. Southern District of New York View
2020-03-16 N/A Deadline for Defendants' reply Southern District of New York View
2020-03-10 N/A Plaintiff served 68 Requests for Production and 14 Interrogatories on Defendants. N/A View
2020-02-28 N/A Deadline for Defendants to file motion to dismiss USDC SDNY View
2020-02-28 N/A Filing of Notice of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss New York, New York View
2020-02-24 N/A New deadline for Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (extended from Feb 21). New York, NY View
2020-02-24 N/A Proposed new deadline for Defendant's motion to dismiss. Court View
2020-02-24 N/A Order issued granting plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within two weeks. New York, New York View
2020-02-21 N/A Deadline for Defendants' motion to dismiss Southern District of New York View
2020-02-19 N/A Proposed new deadline for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. N/A View
2020-02-17 N/A Proposed extended deadline for Defendants to answer or respond to the complaint. Court View
2020-01-28 N/A Filing of Joint Stipulation and Order on Plaintiff's Anonymity Southern District of New York View
2020-01-23 N/A Parties exchanged initial Rule 26 disclosures. N/A View

020.pdf

A 'Notice of Appearance' filed on March 6, 2020, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Attorney Sabina Mariella of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP officially enters her appearance as counsel for the plaintiff, Maria Farmer, in her lawsuit against Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate.

Legal document (notice of appearance)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

019.pdf

This document is a Notice of Appearance filed on March 6, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for Case No. 1:19-cv-10474. Attorney Andrew Villacastin of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP formally enters his appearance as counsel for the Plaintiff, Maria Farmer. The lawsuit is directed against Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn in their capacities as executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Edward Epstein.

Legal document (notice of appearance)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

018.pdf

A letter from attorney Imran H. Ansari, representing non-party Alan Dershowitz, to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in the case of Maria Farmer v. the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. The letter requests that the Court order the plaintiff to file an amended complaint removing specific allegations regarding Dershowitz (paragraph 39) that the Court had previously ordered stricken as 'redundant, immaterial, impertinent, and/or scandalous' on December 23, 2019.

Legal correspondence / court filing
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

017.pdf

This document is a court order from the Southern District of New York dated February 24, 2020, in the case of Maria Farmer v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate). The order grants attorney Mary "Molly" S. DiRago of Troutman Sanders LLP admission to practice Pro Hac Vice to represent the defendants.

Court order (order for admission pro hac vice)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

016.pdf

A court order from the Southern District of New York dated February 24, 2020, in the case of Maria Farmer v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn. Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald grants the plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within two weeks to address deficiencies before the defendants file a proposed motion. The order also sets parameters for a briefing schedule if no amended complaint is filed.

Court order
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

015.pdf

This document is a Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice filed on February 14, 2020, in the case of Maria Farmer v. the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. Attorney Molly S. DiRago of Troutman Sanders LLP requests permission to represent the defendants, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (Co-Executors of Epstein's estate), in the Southern District of New York. The attorney attests to her good standing in Illinois and lack of disciplinary history.

Legal motion (motion for admission pro hac vice)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

013.pdf

This document is a legal letter dated January 24, 2020, from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz (representing the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein) to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald. The letter requests a pre-motion conference to move for the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Maria Farmer. The defense argues that Farmer's claims of assault occurring in Ohio in 1995/1996 are time-barred under both New York and Ohio statutes of limitations and that her arguments for tolling (based on Epstein's later criminal indictment or equitable estoppel) are legally insufficient. It also argues that punitive damages cannot be awarded against an estate.

Legal correspondence / motion for pre-motion conference
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

012.pdf

A court order from December 23, 2019, in the case of Maria Farmer v. Indyke and Kahn. Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald ordered the striking of a specific allegation from the plaintiff's complaint which stated that Maria Farmer observed Alan Dershowitz at 'the mansion' going upstairs at the same time as young girls. The judge ruled the allegation immaterial to the specific case at hand and noted that the veracity of such claims was better suited for the separate 'Giuffre v. Dershowitz' litigation.

Court order
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

011.pdf

This document is a legal reply letter dated December 16, 2019, from attorneys representing Alan Dershowitz to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald. Dershowitz seeks to intervene in the civil case *Maria Farmer v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein* to strike specific allegations in the complaint he deems scandalous and irrelevant, and to request sanctions against Farmer and her legal team (Boies Schiller Flexner LLP). The letter argues that the allegations against Dershowitz have no bearing on Farmer's claims of battery and emotional distress against the Epstein Estate and are part of a 'campaign of personal animus'.

Legal correspondence (reply letter to court)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

009.pdf

This document is a letter from Alan Dershowitz's legal counsel to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald requesting a pre-motion conference to intervene in the civil case 'Maria Farmer v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein'. Dershowitz seeks to strike paragraph 39 of Farmer's complaint, which alleges she saw him at Epstein's New York mansion going upstairs with young girls brought by Ghislaine Maxwell. Dershowitz argues this allegation is demonstrably false based on chronology (claiming he didn't meet Epstein until after Farmer left) and is legally irrelevant to the estate case, serving only to defame him.

Legal correspondence / motion for intervention
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

008.pdf

This document is a Waiver of the Service of Summons filed on November 27, 2019, in the case of Maria Farmer v. Darren K. Indyke et al (Case No. 1:19-cv-10474-NRB) in the Southern District of New York. Attorney Bennet Moskowitz of Troutman Sanders LLP signed the waiver on November 25, 2019, on behalf of defendants Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, agreeing to waive formal service and respond to the complaint within 60 days. The waiver is addressed to plaintiff's attorney David Boies.

Legal document (waiver of the service of summons)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

007.pdf

A court order from the Southern District of New York dated November 25, 2019, in the case of Maria Farmer v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Edward Epstein). The order grants attorney Sigrid S. McCawley of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP admission to practice Pro Hac Vice to represent the plaintiff, Maria Farmer.

Court order
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

006.pdf

This document is a Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice filed on November 21, 2019, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Attorney Sigrid S. McCawley of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP requests permission to represent the plaintiff, Maria Farmer, in her case against the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn.

Legal motion (motion for admission pro hac vice)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

003.pdf

This document is a Summons in a Civil Action filed on November 12, 2019, in the Southern District of New York (Case 1:19-cv-10474-NRB). Plaintiff Maria Farmer is suing Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn in their capacities as executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Edward Epstein. The summons directs the defendants to respond to the complaint within 21 days of service, with Joshua Schiller of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP listed as the plaintiff's attorney.

Summons in a civil action (ao 440)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

002.pdf

This document is a Civil Cover Sheet filed on November 12, 2019, in the Southern District of New York for a lawsuit initiated by Maria Farmer against Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn in their capacities as executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Edward Epstein. The nature of the suit is categorized as 'Other Personal Injury' under diversity jurisdiction, as the plaintiff resides in Arkansas and the defendants are deemed citizens of the U.S. Virgin Islands (Epstein's domicile). The plaintiff demands a jury trial.

Civil cover sheet (form js 44c/sdny)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

052.pdf

This document is a legal stipulation filed on November 5, 2021, in the Southern District of New York, regarding case 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF. The plaintiff, 'Jane Doe,' voluntarily dismisses her claims with prejudice against the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn. The dismissal is agreed upon by counsel for both parties without costs to either side.

Legal filing (stipulation of voluntary dismissal)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

049.pdf

This document is a legal letter dated September 10, 2021, filed by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Pepper on behalf of the Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein (Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn). The letter is addressed to Judge Debra C. Freeman regarding the case 'Jane Doe v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn' (Case 1:20-cv-02365). The defense informs the court that they are working jointly with the Plaintiff to settle the matter out of court and requests a sixty-day stay of proceedings until November 9, 2021.

Legal correspondence / court filing
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

047.pdf

This document is a legal notice filed on September 6, 2021, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF). The defendants, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate), represented by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz, are moving to dismiss the complaint filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6).

Legal notice / motion to dismiss
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

044.pdf

A letter from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz to Judge Debra C. Freeman dated August 26, 2021, regarding the case Jane Doe v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn. The letter requests the withdrawal of a previously filed Joint Proposed Discovery Schedule (ECF No. 40) because it contained incorrect signature and contact information for the Plaintiff's counsel.

Legal correspondence / court filing
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

042.pdf

This document is a court order from the Southern District of New York dated August 26, 2021, in the civil case of Jane Doe v. Indyke and Kahn. The order grants a motion for attorney Mary 'Molly' S. DiRago of Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP to appear pro hac vice as counsel for the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate. It is signed by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman.

Court order (order for admission pro hac vice)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

034.pdf

This is a legal declaration filed on August 13, 2021, by Bennet J. Moskowitz, attorney for the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate (Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn). The document serves to introduce 15 exhibits (Exhibit A through Exhibit O) into the court record in support of the executors' statement regarding the plaintiff's application to proceed anonymously. The nature and content of these exhibits are completely redacted in this document, and a separate page indicates the exhibits themselves were filed under seal.

Legal declaration (declaration of bennet j. moskowitz)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

033.pdf

Legal correspondence dated August 13, 2021, from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz to Judge Debra C. Freeman regarding the case of Jane Doe v. the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. The letter requests permission to file a redacted statement concerning the Plaintiff's application to proceed anonymously. While the Co-Executors (Indyke and Kahn) do not oppose the anonymity, they wish to present specific material facts relevant to the application for the Court's consideration.

Legal correspondence (letter motion)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

032.pdf

This document is a Notice of Appearance filed on August 13, 2021, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case 1:20-cv-02365). Attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP enters his appearance as counsel for Defendants Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, in their capacities as Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, in a lawsuit brought by a Jane Doe.

Legal document (notice of appearance)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

029.pdf

This document is a Notice of Motion filed on July 30, 2021, in the Southern District of New York (Case 1:20-cv-02365). Plaintiff Jane Doe is notifying the defendants (Executors of the Epstein Estate and various associated corporate entities) that she is moving the court for an order allowing her to proceed anonymously in the lawsuit.

Legal notice (notice of motion)
2025-12-26
Analysis Source

028.pdf

This document is a legal letter dated June 30, 2021, from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz to Judge Debra C. Freeman regarding the case Jane Doe v. Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein. The letter requests the lifting of a stay on the proceedings. A court order is superimposed on the document, dated July 22, 2021, which grants the request, lifts the stay, sets deadlines for filings, and schedules a telephonic pretrial conference for August 26, 2021.

Legal correspondence / court order
2025-12-26
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
0
As Recipient
0
Total
0
No communications found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search