RICHARD D. KAHN
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Executor |
78
Very Strong
|
74 | |
|
person
JEFFREY EDWARD EPSTEIN
|
Executor |
49
Very Strong
|
49 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Executor of estate |
22
Very Strong
|
22 | |
|
person
Bennet J. Moskowitz
|
Client |
19
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
Bennet J. Moskowitz
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
JEFFREY EDWARD EPSTEIN
|
Executor of estate |
8
Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Executor |
8
Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Executor representative |
7
|
7 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Executor of estate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Executor deceased |
5
|
5 | |
|
person
Darren K. Indyke
|
Co executors |
5
|
5 | |
|
person
Mary S. Dirago
|
Client |
4
|
4 | |
|
person
Darren K. Indyke
|
Co defendants |
4
|
4 | |
|
organization
Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein
|
Executor |
3
|
3 | |
|
person
Maria Farmer
|
Legal representative |
3
|
3 | |
|
person
Mary "Molly" S. Dirago
|
Client |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Charles L. Glover
|
Client |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Mary S. Dirago
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Teresa Helm
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Estate executor |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Valerie Sirota
|
Client |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Darren K. Indyke
|
Professional |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Charles L. Glover
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Business associate |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Executor administrator |
1
|
1 |
| 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 |
076.pdf
This document is a Joint Stipulation for Dismissal filed on December 8, 2020, in the U.S. District Court (SDNY). The plaintiff 'VE' and the defendants (Epstein's estate executors Indyke and Kahn, along with associated entities) agreed to dismiss the case with prejudice because the plaintiff resolved her claims through the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program. The order was signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan.
074.pdf
A legal status report filed on December 1, 2020, by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz regarding the case 'VE v. Darren Indyke and Richard D. Kahn'. The document informs Judge Debra C. Freeman that the plaintiff (VE) has submitted a claim to the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program and has received an award offer which she is considering. The parties request that the court case remain stayed while this settlement process concludes.
073.pdf
This document is a status report letter filed on November 2, 2020, by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Pepper on behalf of the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and the Plaintiff 'VE'. It informs Judge Debra C. Freeman that the Plaintiff has submitted a claim to the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program which is currently under review. Consequently, both parties jointly request that the ongoing litigation (Case No. 1:19-cv-07625-AJN-DF) remain stayed to preserve resources and judicial economy.
072.pdf
A legal status report filed on October 1, 2020, by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz on behalf of the Epstein Estate executors (Indyke and Kahn) and the Plaintiff 'VE'. The letter informs Judge Freeman that the Plaintiff has submitted a claim to the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program which is under review, and consequently requests that the civil case remain stayed.
068.pdf
This is a Notice of Change of Address filed on July 8, 2020, in the Southern District of New York for case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN (VE v. Indyke et al.). Attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz notifies the court that his firm, Troutman Sanders LLP, has changed its name to Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP. The physical address and contact numbers remain unchanged.
066.pdf
This document is a Joint Stipulation and Order Staying Action from June 2020 in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff 'VE' and the defendants (Epstein's estate executors Indyke and Kahn, and associated entities) agreed to pause the litigation to allow the plaintiff to participate in the 'Epstein Victims' Compensation Program,' a non-adversarial alternative. Judge Debra Freeman signed the order, staying the case and requiring a status report by August 14, 2020.
065.pdf
This document is a Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order filed on June 12, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:19-cv-07625). The plaintiff, identified as 'VE', and the defendants (Executors of the Epstein Estate and associated entities) agreed to stay the lawsuit to allow the plaintiff to participate in the 'Epstein Victims' Compensation Program', a non-adversarial alternative for resolving sexual abuse claims. The document is signed by attorneys Brad Edwards (for the plaintiff) and Bennet J. Moskowitz (for the defendants).
062.pdf
A Notice of Appearance filed on May 12, 2020, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. Attorney Charles L. Glover of Troutman Sanders LLP formally enters his appearance as counsel for the defendants, including the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein's executors (Indyke and Kahn) and associated corporate entities, in a case brought by plaintiff 'VE'.
060.pdf
A letter from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Sanders LLP to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al. The letter serves to supplement a pending motion to dismiss by submitting a recent Opinion & Order from Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in a related case (Mary Doe v. Indyke et al.), which dismissed punitive damages claims against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein's executors. The defense argues this precedent supports dismissing punitive damages in the current action.
054.pdf
This document is a Joint Proposed Discovery Schedule filed on February 6, 2020, in the case of VE v. Indyke et al. It outlines the agreed-upon timeline for the exchange of evidence, including initial disclosures, medical records, and expert reports. The filing identifies the key subjects of discovery as Epstein's alleged torts against the plaintiff, the liability of the corporate defendants, and the plaintiff's damages.
050.pdf
This document is a letter filed on January 2, 2020, by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Sanders LLP to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The letter pertains to the case 'VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al.' and requests oral argument on the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Moskowitz represents the Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein (Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn) and associated entities.
047.pdf
This document is a letter dated December 26, 2019, from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Sanders LLP to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It requests a one-week extension (until January 2, 2020) for the defendants, including the Co-Executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate (Indyke and Kahn) and related corporate entities, to file a reply supporting their Motion to Dismiss in the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street. The plaintiff consented to this extension request.
045.pdf
This document is a Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law opposing a Motion to Dismiss in the case of VE v. Indyke et al. The plaintiff, a victim of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse beginning in 2001 at age 16, argues that the corporate defendants (Nine East 71st Street Corp, Financial Trust Company, and NES LLC) are liable for negligence, negligent security, and negligent supervision. The memorandum asserts these entities were integral to Epstein's sex trafficking enterprise, with employees facilitating the recruitment and scheduling of victims, and argues that claims are valid under the New York Child Victims Act.
039-01.pdf
This document is a blank Non-Disclosure Agreement form filed on December 4, 2019, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York regarding Case No. 1:19-cv-07625-AJN (VE v. Indyke et al.). The agreement requires signatories to maintain the confidentiality of the Plaintiff's identity ('VE') in connection with the litigation against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and associated entities. It stipulates that willful violation of the agreement may result in punishment for contempt of court.
038.pdf
This document is a Memorandum of Law filed on November 29, 2019, by the defendants (Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and associated corporate entities) in the case VE v. Indyke et al. The defendants move to dismiss several counts of the plaintiff's complaint, arguing that the battery claim is time-barred and not revived by the Child Victims Act because it is distinct from claims under NY Penal Law § 130. Furthermore, they argue that negligence claims against the corporate defendants (Nine East, FTC, and NES) are based on vague, conclusory allegations that fail to establish a duty of care, breach, or proximate cause, and that punitive damages are legally barred against an estate.
037.pdf
This document is a legal declaration filed on November 29, 2019, by Bennet J. Moskowitz, an attorney for the defendants in the case of VE v. Darren K. Indyke, et al. Moskowitz declares his representation of the Co-Executors of the Jeffrey Epstein Estate and associated corporate entities. The declaration serves to submit a copy of the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint as an exhibit to support the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.
030.pdf
This document is a Memorandum of Law filed on November 15, 2019, in the US District Court (SDNY) by the Co-Executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate (Indyke and Kahn) and associated entities. The defendants state they do not object to the Plaintiff 'VE' proceeding anonymously but request the court enter a specific 'Proposed Order' to ensure they can adequately defend themselves and conduct discovery while maintaining her confidentiality from the general public. The filing argues that while anonymity is acceptable, it must not prejudice the defense's ability to investigate the allegations.
030-01.pdf
This document is a Court Order from the Southern District of New York filed on November 15, 2019, in the case of VE v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (Epstein Estate representatives). Judge Alison J. Nathan ordered strict protocols to protect the anonymity of the plaintiff 'VE,' requiring filings identifying the plaintiff to be sealed and limiting disclosure of their identity strictly to the defense team for legal necessity.
029.pdf
A letter from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz to Judge Alison J. Nathan requesting a two-week extension for the Epstein Estate executors and associated entities to respond to a complaint in the case 'VE v. Nine East 71st Street'. The Judge granted the request on November 14, 2019, extending the deadline to November 29, 2019, but handwritten notes explicitly state 'No further extensions'.
027.pdf
A letter from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated November 12, 2019, requesting a two-week extension for the Defendants (Executors of Epstein's Estate and related entities) to respond to the Plaintiff's complaint in the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al. The letter notes that Plaintiff's counsel refused to consent to the extension.
025.pdf
This document is a letter dated October 29, 2019, from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Sanders LLP to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The letter represents the Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein (Indyke and Kahn) and associated corporate entities in the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al. It serves to clarify the record regarding an ex parte order issued in a related case (Katlyn Doe) and requests an extension until November 15, 2019, to respond to the Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed Anonymously.
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.
021.pdf
This document is a legal letter dated September 18, 2019, from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Sanders LLP to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It concerns the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al., representing the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and associated entities. The letter confirms an agreement between the parties to accept service of the complaint and extends the defendants' deadline to respond until November 15, 2019; the request was 'So Ordered' by the judge on September 19, 2019.
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.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity