Indyke
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Doe
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
organization
DOE
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe 1000
|
Legal representative |
3
|
3 | |
|
person
Priscilla Doe
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Business associate |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Bennet J. Moskowitz
|
Client |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Katlyn Doe
|
Litigation |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Katlyn Doe
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Plaintiffs (Does, Farmer, Helm, etc.)
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Juliette Bryant
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
location
Lifestyles Convention
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Plaintiffs (Various Does, Farmer, Helm, etc.)
|
Litigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
DEBRA FREEMAN
|
Judicial authority |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe 1000
|
Plaintiff defendant |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Priscilla Doe
|
Litigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lisa Doe
|
Litigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Farmer
|
Litigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Helm
|
Litigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Victim-1
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Norman Davies
|
Litigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe
|
Plaintiff defendant |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Various Plaintiffs (Does, Farmer, Helm, etc.)
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Filing | Filing of a civil case, Doe 3 v. Indyke. | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| N/A | Legal filing | The Doe v. Indyke case was initiated after the Government opened its investigation and after the ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal case | The civil case Doe v. Indyke, where discovery was just beginning and the Government moved to inte... | N/A | View |
| 2021-12-21 | N/A | Legal Conference | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2020-09-14 | N/A | Order Granting Motion to Stay in Doe v. Indyke | Court | View |
| 2020-09-14 | N/A | Order Granting Motion to Stay in Doe v. Indyke et al. | Court (Case No. 20-cv-00484) | View |
| 2020-03-30 | N/A | Original deadline for Defendants' reply papers | SDNY | View |
| 2020-03-05 | N/A | Transcript of Premotion Conference, Farmer v. Indyke, et al., No. 19-cv-10475 (LGS) (S.D.N.Y.) | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2020-02-12 | N/A | Judge Lewis J. Liman issued an order denying the request for a pre-motion conference as moot and ... | New York, New York | View |
| 2019-08-05 | N/A | Intensive legal visits for Jeffrey Epstein. | MCC New York | View |
| 2019-08-02 | N/A | Legal visits for Jeffrey Epstein. | MCC New York | View |
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.
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.
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.
030.pdf
This document is a letter dated March 20, 2020, from attorney Joshua I. Schiller of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP to Judge Paul G. Gardephe. It requests oral argument regarding the Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint in the case of Helm v. Indyke et al. The letter argues that the Plaintiff's claims are timely under New York law and doctrines of equitable estoppel/tolling, contrary to the Defendants' assertions.
023.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Change of Address' filed on March 9, 2020, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case Teresa Helm v. Indyke, et al. (Case No. 19-cv-10476-PGG). Attorney Sabina Mariella notifies the court and parties that she has moved from the law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP and will continue as counsel of record on the case.
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.
013.pdf
Legal correspondence from Boies Schiller Flexner LLP to Judge Gardephe regarding the case Helm v. Indyke et al. The letter argues against the Defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss, asserting that Plaintiff Teresa Helm's claims are timely under NY CPLR § 215(8)(a) due to the recent termination of Epstein's criminal case (August 2019) and the doctrine of equitable estoppel based on Epstein's intimidation and manipulation tactics. The letter also argues that challenges to punitive damages are premature at this stage of litigation.
011.pdf
This document is a court order filed on January 14, 2020, by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman in the Southern District of New York. It coordinates the discovery schedules for multiple civil cases filed against the Jeffrey Epstein estate (represented by Indyke et al.) by various plaintiffs claiming sexual abuse. The order mandates the submission of discovery plans by February 6, 2020, and sets a joint pretrial conference for February 11, 2020.
021.pdf
This document is a Notice of Change of Address filed on March 9, 2020, in the case of Maria Farmer v. Indyke, et al. (Case No. 19-cv-10474-NRB) in the Southern District of New York. Attorney Sabina Mariella notifies the court that she has moved from Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP and will continue to serve as counsel of record in the case.
014.pdf
This document is a legal letter from Boies Schiller Flexner LLP on behalf of Plaintiff Maria Farmer in the case 'Farmer v. Indyke et al.' It argues against the Defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss, asserting that Farmer's claims are timely under NY CPLR § 215(8)(a) because they were filed within one year of the termination of the criminal action against Jeffrey Epstein (Aug 29, 2019). The letter also argues that equitable estoppel applies due to threats made against Farmer, including a specific death threat involving the West Side Highway.
010.pdf
This document is a letter from Maria Farmer's legal counsel to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald opposing Alan Dershowitz's motion to intervene in the case *Farmer v. Indyke et al.*. Dershowitz sought to intervene to strike Paragraph 39 of Farmer's complaint, which alleges that Farmer, while working at Epstein's NY mansion, saw Dershowitz go upstairs while young girls were present. The letter argues that Dershowitz has no right to intervene, that the allegations are relevant to the sex-trafficking conspiracy and Farmer's silence, and that the motion to strike is meritless.
015.pdf
A court order from the Southern District of New York, dated September 4, 2020, by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman. The order applies to multiple civil cases filed against 'Indyke et al.' (executors of the Epstein estate) and 'Nine East 71st Street et al.' The proceedings are stayed to allow plaintiffs to pursue settlements through the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program, with status reports required starting October 1, 2020.
038.pdf
A court order from the Southern District of New York, dated September 4, 2020, by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman. The order applies to multiple civil cases against Indyke et al. and Nine East 71st Street et al., staying proceedings to allow plaintiffs to pursue settlements through the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program. Parties are ordered to submit status reports starting October 1, 2020.
046.pdf
A court order from the Southern District of New York dated September 4, 2020, by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman. The document lists numerous civil cases filed against 'Indyke et al.' (Epstein's estate executors) by various victims (Does, Farmer, Helm, etc.). The order acknowledges a stay in proceedings to allow plaintiffs to pursue settlements through the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program and mandates monthly status reports starting October 1, 2020.
041.pdf
A letter motion filed on March 6, 2020, by Andrew S. Buzin of Buzin Law P.C. requesting permission to withdraw as local counsel for plaintiff Jane Doe 17 in her case against Indyke and Kahn (executors of the Epstein estate). The client requested the discharge, and she remains represented by attorneys from Weisman, Brodie, Starr & Margolies, P.A. and Alan Goldfarb, P.A. The letter notes that the case is currently stayed pending the plaintiff's potential participation in the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program.
070.pdf
A court order dated September 4, 2020, by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman of the Southern District of New York. The order directs the docketing of stays in multiple lawsuits against Indyke et al. and Nine East 71st Street et al. to allow plaintiffs to pursue settlements through the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program. Parties are required to submit status reports starting October 1, 2020.
028.pdf
This document is a court order from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated February 12, 2020, in the case of Jane Doe 1000 v. Indyke, et al. Judge Lewis J. Liman denied a request for a pre-motion conference as moot, allowing the Defendant to proceed directly with filing a motion to dismiss.
027.pdf
Scheduling Order issued by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman on February 11, 2020, for multiple consolidated cases against the Epstein estate (Indyke et al.). The order sets deadlines for initial disclosures, discovery requests, motions to amend, fact discovery completion (June 10, 2020), and expert reports.
025.pdf
A legal letter from Boies Schiller Flexner LLP to Judge Lorna G. Schofield arguing against the Defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss in the case of Jane Doe 1000 v. Indyke et al. The letter argues that the Plaintiff's claims are timely under New York Law (CPLR § 215(8)(a) and § 213-c) and the doctrine of equitable estoppel due to Epstein's intimidation tactics. It also asserts that punitive damages should be addressed after discovery.
018.pdf
This is an Order of Reference to a Magistrate Judge filed on January 2, 2020, in the Southern District of New York. Judge Lorna G. Schofield refers the case of Jane Doe 1000 v. Indyke, et al. (Case No. 19 Civ. 10577) to Magistrate Judge Kevin N. Fox for general pre-trial purposes, including scheduling, discovery, and settlement.
016.pdf
A court order from the Southern District of New York dated January 2, 2020, in the case of Jane Doe 1000 v. Indyke, et al. (Case 19 Civ. 10577). District Judge Lorna G. Schofield refers the action to Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman for general pre-trial and dispositive motions (all purposes except trial).
035.pdf
Legal correspondence from Plaintiff's attorney Daniel Mullkoff to Judge Debra Freeman regarding the case Davies v. Indyke et al. The letter argues that the Defendants improperly raised a new argument concerning the New Mexico statute of limitations for the first time in a reply brief and contends that the Plaintiff's claims regarding sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein in New Mexico are timely under the discovery rule.
029.pdf
A legal letter dated March 16, 2020, from attorney Mariann Meier Wang to Judge Debra Freeman in the case Davies v. Indyke et al. The letter requests a one-week extension for briefing deadlines regarding a motion to dismiss, citing disruptions caused by COVID-19 response measures. Opposing counsel Bennet J. Moskowitz consented to the request.
021.pdf
This document is a Scheduling Order issued on February 11, 2020, by U.S. Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman in the Southern District of New York. It consolidates deadlines for discovery, expert reports, and settlement discussions across thirteen related civil cases involving plaintiffs (many anonymous Does) suing 'Indyke et al.' (referring to the Epstein estate executors) and 'Nine East 71st Street'. The order establishes a timeline for fact discovery to conclude by June 2020 and expert discovery by July 2020.
018.pdf
A letter dated January 27, 2020, from attorney Mariann Meier Wang to Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman regarding the case Davies v. Indyke et al. The letter seeks clarification on procedural requirements following the referral of the case and proposes a briefing schedule for the Defendants' motion to dismiss, with dates ranging from February to March 2020. It references prior court filings from January 21 and January 22, 2020.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity