EpsteinProject.org

Court records

038_4

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-09610-PAE-DCF            Document 38        Filed 01/08/20         Page 1 of 2




UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


JANE DOE 17,

                               Plaintiff,
               v.                                            Case No. 1:19-cv-09610-PAE-DCF

DARREN K. INDYKE AND RICHARD D. KAHN,
AS JOINT PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF
THE ESTATE OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, NINE
EAST 71st STREET CORPORATION, LAUREL,
INC., FINANCIAL TRUST COMPANY, INC.,
NES, LLC, MAPLE, INC., LSJE, LLC, HBRK
ASSOCIATES, INC., NAUTILUS, INC.,
CYPRESS, INC. and JEGE, INC.

                               Defendants.

             JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING ACTION

        WHEREAS independent claims administration experts are designing and implementing

the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program (the “Program”) to resolve sexual abuse claims

against decedent Jeffrey E. Epstein (“Decedent”) in a non-adversarial alternative to litigation;

and

        WHEREAS Plaintiff Jane Doe 17 (“Plaintiff”; and together with Defendants Darren K.

Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, Nine East 71st

Street Corporation, Laurel, Inc., Financial Trust Company Inc., NES LLC, Maple, Inc., LSJE,

LLC, HBRK Associates, Inc., Nautilus, Inc., Cypress, Inc., and JEGE, Inc., the “Parties”) seeks

to participate in the Program; and

        WHEREAS the Parties seek to preserve their resources and judicial economy by staying

this action unless and until Plaintiff ceases her participation in the Program; and




40967362v1
     Case 1:19-cv-09610-PAE-DCF             Document 38         Filed 01/08/20      Page 2 of 2




        WHEREAS, should Plaintiff resolve her claims against Decedent via the Program, the

Parties will thereafter promptly discontinue this action with prejudice;

        WHEREAS, on December 23, 2019, Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint

(ECF Nos. 34-36); and

        WHEREAS 

[…]

Open in the archive