Court records
- Format
- Set
- Court Records
- Text
- Searchable
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 30 Filed 11/15/19 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATESDISTRICTCOURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICTOF NEW YORK
VE,
Plaintiff,
v.
DARREN K.INDYKEAND RICHARD D.KAHN, Case No.1:19-cv-07625-AJN
ASJOINTPERSONALREPRESENTATIVESOF
THEESTATEOF JEFFREY E.EPSTEIN,NINE
EAST71st STREET,CORPORATION,FINANCIAL
TRUSTCOMPANY,INC. ,NES,LLC,
Defendants.
DEFENDANTS’MEMORANDUM OFLAW IN RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY
Case 1:19-cv-07625-AJN-DCF Document 30 Filed 11/15/19 Page 2 of 4
Defendants Darren K.Indyke and Richard D.Kahn,Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey
E.Epstein (incorrectlynamed herein as “Joint Personal Representatives”of the Estate of Jeffrey
E.Epstein),Nine East 71st Street,Corporation,Financial Trust Company,Inc.
,and NES,LLC
(together,“Defendants”),by their attorneys,submit this memorandum of law in response to
Plaintiff’s Motion For Leave To Proceed Anonymously(the Motion)(ECF #4):
ARGUMENT
Defendants do not object to Plaintiff proceeding under a pseudonym to prevent the
disclosure of her identityto the general public.However,this response is necessaryfor two
separate reasons.
First,Plaintiff’s Motion asserts numerous unproven statements,couched as facts already
in evidence,as well as conclusions of law.Defendants object to these unproven and conclusory
assertions.In anyevent,the Court does not need to consider suchassertions to resolve Plaintiff’s
Motion.
Second,it is imperative that Plaintiff’s desire to shield her identityfrom the general
public not come at the expense of Defendants’fundamental right to fullyand fairlyrespond to
Plaintiff’s allegations in her Complaint.Therefore,Defendants respectfullyrequest that
[…]