Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A.
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-09-07 | N/A | Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for Plaintiff is GRANTED | Superior Court of the Virgi... | View |
2022.09.07%20Order%20Granting.pdf
This document is a court order from the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands dated September 7, 2022, in the civil case of Ghislaine Maxwell vs. Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein et al. The court granted the motion for Maxwell's attorneys (Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A. and Kyle R. Waldner) to withdraw as counsel. The case was stayed for 60 days to allow Maxwell to find new representation, with instructions that all future legal correspondence be mailed directly to her at FCI Tallahassee.
2022.08.02%20Memorandum%20Of%20Law.pdf
This document is a Supplemental Brief filed on August 1, 2022, by the Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein (Indyke and Kahn) in the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands. The brief supports a Motion to Dismiss Ghislaine Maxwell's complaint seeking indemnification from the Estate. The Co-Executors argue that because Maxwell was convicted of intentional criminal acts (sex trafficking and conspiracy) in the Southern District of New York on June 29, 2022, public policy prohibits enforcing any contract or equitable doctrine that would indemnify her for the financial consequences of her crimes.
2022.08.01%20Brief.pdf
This document is a legal brief filed by Ghislaine Maxwell in the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. Maxwell argues that Virgin Islands public policy does not prevent her from seeking indemnification (reimbursement) for legal fees and security costs incurred due to her employment with Epstein, despite her criminal conviction in New York (SDNY). She asserts claims based on contract promises, common law joint tortfeasor indemnity, and corporate indemnity laws regarding her role at NES, LLC.
2021.04.13%20Reply%20Motion.pdf
This document is a 'Plaintiff's Reply to Co-Executors' Brief' filed on April 13, 2021, in the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands by Ghislaine Maxwell's legal team. Maxwell argues that her indemnification case against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein should not be transferred to the Complex Litigation Division nor assigned to the same judge handling the 'CICO action' (Government v. Indyke). She asserts that her case does not meet the criteria for complex litigation and shares no common facts or claims with the government's racketeering case against the executors.
2021.03.29%20Response%20to%20Order.pdf
This document is a legal brief filed on March 29, 2021, by the Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein (Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn) in the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands. The brief argues against designating Ghislaine Maxwell's lawsuit for legal fee indemnification as 'complex' litigation and opposes consolidating it with a separate government 'CICO action' (Case No. ST-2020-CV-00014). The Executors contend that Maxwell's case is a simple single-issue dispute, whereas the CICO action involves complex allegations of a multi-decade criminal enterprise.
2020.09.28%20Response%20to%20Opposition.pdf
This is a Reply Brief filed by the Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein (Indyke and Kahn) in response to a lawsuit by Ghislaine Maxwell. Maxwell is suing the Estate and NES, LLC for indemnification (payment of her legal fees) related to her criminal and civil cases in New York. The Co-Executors argue the case should be dismissed because: 1) The claim is 'unripe' as her underlying guilt or innocence hasn't been established; 2) Public policy forbids indemnifying criminal conduct; 3) The NES Operating Agreement explicitly allows the company to decline indemnification; and 4) The Statute of Frauds bars claims based on alleged oral promises.
2020.07.30%20Stipulation%20For%20Extension%20of%20Time.pdf
This document is a legal stipulation filed on July 30, 2020, in the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands (Case ST-20-CV-155). It represents an agreement between Ghislaine Maxwell (Plaintiff) and the Government of the U.S. Virgin Islands (Proposed Intervenor) to extend the deadline for Maxwell to respond to the Government's Motion to Intervene until August 17, 2020. The document lists the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and his executors, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, as defendants.
2020.07.13%20Motion%20to%20Intervene.pdf
This document is a Motion to Intervene filed by the Government of the US Virgin Islands in a civil case brought by Ghislaine Maxwell against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. The Government seeks to intervene to prevent Maxwell from using the Estate's assets to pay for her legal defense (indemnification), arguing that those assets should be preserved to satisfy a potential judgment in the Government's separate CICO (racketeering) lawsuit against the Estate. The document details Maxwell's evasion of subpoenas prior to her arrest, the Government's interest in the Estate's assets for victim restitution and penalties, and the allegation that Maxwell and the Estate are colluding rather than being true adversaries. While flight logs are mentioned as existing evidence of trafficking, no specific flight records are contained within this specific motion.
2020.03.12%20Civil%20Complaint.pdf
This document is a civil complaint filed on March 12, 2020, by Ghislaine Maxwell against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and its executors, Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, as well as NES, LLC. Maxwell seeks indemnification for legal fees, security costs, and safe accommodation expenses she has incurred due to her prior employment with Epstein. The complaint alleges that Epstein repeatedly promised, both verbally and in writing (specifically in a 2004 letter), to support Maxwell financially and indemnify her, a practice he reportedly maintained during previous lawsuits in 2009 and 2017.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity