Nine East 71st Street Corporation
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
Lifestyles Convention
|
Legal representative |
4
|
4 | |
|
location
Lifestyles Convention
|
Litigation |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Executive |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe
|
Plaintiff defendant |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-29 | N/A | Defendants filed Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint [DE 36] | Court | View |
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.
055.pdf
Scheduling Order issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman on February 11, 2020, coordinating deadlines for multiple civil lawsuits against the Epstein Estate (Indyke et al.) and Nine East 71st Street. The order establishes deadlines for initial disclosures, document requests, fact discovery (June 10, 2020), and expert discovery (July 31, 2020), and notes ongoing settlement discussions with a status report due by April 30, 2020. The document lists 13 separate civil actions being managed together under this order.
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.
053.pdf
Court order from the Southern District of New York dated January 14, 2020, coordinating pretrial supervision for multiple civil lawsuits filed by women alleging sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Debra Freeman orders the parties to submit a discovery schedule by February 6, 2020, and schedules a joint pretrial conference for February 11, 2020. The document lists thirteen specific cases involving plaintiffs such as Katlyn Doe, Priscilla Doe, and others against Indyke and other Epstein-related entities.
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.
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.
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'.
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.
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.
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.
016.pdf
This document is a Scheduling Order from the US District Court (SDNY) dated February 11, 2020, issued by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman. It consolidates deadlines for discovery, expert reports, and status updates for thirteen related civil cases involving plaintiffs suing the Epstein estate executors (Indyke) and related entities. The order sets a fact discovery deadline of June 10, 2020, and mentions ongoing settlement discussions.
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.
048.pdf
This document is a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice for Case No. 1:19-cv-09610-PAE-DCF in the Southern District of New York, filed on October 8, 2020. Plaintiff Jane Doe 17 voluntarily dismisses her action against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and various associated corporate entities without costs. The document is signed by attorneys David H. Brodie (for the Plaintiff) and Bennet J. Moskowitz (for the Defendants).
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity