EpsteinProject.org

Court records

004-01_5

Format
pdf
Set
Court Records
Text
Searchable

View at the original source

Text as released

Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.

      Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN-DCF   Document 4-1   Filed 08/20/19   Page 1 of 7




                       UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                      SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

                           CASE NO.: 1:19-cv-07625-AJN

VE

              Plaintiff,

vs.

DARREN K. INDYKE AND
RICHARD D. KAHN AS JOINT
PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF
THE ESTATE OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN,
NINE EAST 71ST STREET, CORPORATION,
FINANCIAL TRUST COMPANY, INC.,
NES, LLC,
          Defendant.
___________________________________/




                  MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
                    PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE
                      TO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY
     Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN-DCF        Document 4-1     Filed 08/20/19    Page 2 of 7




                                     ARGUMENT

I.     PLAINTIFF IS PERMITTED TO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY IN
       THIS CIRCUIT.

       This action involves Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual assault of Plaintiff (“Plaintiff”)

in violation of the New York Law and/or the Trafficking Victims Protection Act

under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591 through 1595. Plaintiff submits this Memorandum of Law

in support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed Anonymously. Allowing

Plaintiff to proceed anonymously will protect her highly sensitive personal

information that will remain the focus of this litigation. There is no prejudice to

Defendants in allowing Plaintiff to proceed anonymously, nor is there any significant

public interest in the disclosure of the Plaintiff’s identity. In fact, the public interest

in this case weighs in favor of granting Plaintiff’s request to proceed anonymously

for her protection.

       Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) requires a Complaint to “include the

names of all the parties.” However, the court has discretion to allow a plaintiff to

proceed anonymously. Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185, 190 (2d.

Cir. 2008). “[C]ourts have granted anonymity to protect against disclosure of a wide

ra

[…]

Open in the archive