| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Darren K. Indyke
|
Agent representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-09 | N/A | Filing of Summons in Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-07625-AJN | Southern District of New York | View |
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.
A court order from the Southern District of New York dated June 19, 2020, in the case of VE v. Nine East 71st Street, Corporation, et al. Judge Alison J. Nathan administratively denied the Defendants' motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint without prejudice, citing a stay entered by Judge Freeman in a related matter.
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.
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.
A court order from the Southern District of New York in the case of VE v. Nine East 71st Street Corporation (an Epstein-affiliated entity). Judge Alison J. Nathan directs the court clerk to clear specific docket numbers (4 and 24) which were resolved by a previous docket entry.
A court order from the Southern District of New York dated November 27, 2019, in the case of VE v. Nine East 71st Street, Corporation (an entity associated with Jeffrey Epstein). District Judge Alison J. Nathan adjourns the initial pre-trial conference scheduled for December 6, 2019, indefinitely (sine die) due to a general pre-trial referral to Judge Freeman.
This document is an Order of Reference from the U.S. District Court (SDNY) filed on November 18, 2019. Judge Alison J. Nathan refers the civil case (1:19-cv-07625) between plaintiff 'VE' and defendant 'Nine East 71st Street, Corporation' (Epstein's property entity) to a Magistrate Judge for general pretrial proceedings, including scheduling, discovery, and settlement.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
This document is a 'Notice of Initial Pretrial Conference' issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on August 28, 2019, in the civil case of VE v. Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., and NES, LLC. The order schedules a mandatory pretrial conference for December 6, 2019, at the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse in New York. It instructs counsel to confer regarding settlement and discovery, and to submit a joint letter and Proposed Civil Case Management Plan seven days prior to the conference.
This document is a Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice filed on August 27, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. Attorney Brittany N. Henderson of Edwards Pottinger, LLC requests permission to represent Plaintiff 'VE' in a civil case against the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein and associated entities (Nine East 71st Street Corp, Financial Trust Company, NES LLC). Henderson certifies her good standing with the Florida bar.
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.
A letter from defense attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in the case of Jane Doe 17 v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. The defense requests the court vacate a recent order granting the plaintiff anonymity, not to oppose the anonymity itself, but to ensure they have the opportunity to respond regarding the specific terms of that anonymity to protect their defense rights, citing a previous deadline of December 21, 2019.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity