EpsteinProject.org

Court records

042_17

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-10476-PGG-DCF Document 42 Filed 05/11/20 Page 1 of 2


BSF
                          BOIES
                          SCH ILLER
                          FLEXNER
                                                                                               Sigrid S. McCawley
                                                                                       Telephone: (954) 377-4223
                                                                                     Email: smccawley@bsfllp.com

                                                         May 11, 2020

VIA ECF
The Honorable Debra Freeman
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007-1312

        Re:       Teresa Helm v. Darren K. Indyke & Richard D. Kahn, 19-10476-PGG-DCF

Dear Judge Freeman:
        We submit on behalf of Plaintiff Teresa Helm this reply in further support of her letter
motion for a conference to address Defendants’ complete failure to participate in discovery to date
(ECF No. 37), and in response to Defendants’ letter, filed on May 8, 2020 (ECF No. 38). As set
forth in Plaintiff’s opening letter, Defendants refuse to produce documents concerning Jeffrey
Epstein’s sex-trafficking conspiracy. Instead, they offer to produce only documents that directly
mention Plaintiff’s name, and documents only from limited time periods surrounding the specific
dates on which she was abused. ECF No. 37. Defendants also failed to respond to any of Plaintiff’s
Rule 33 interrogatories. Defendants’ opposition admittedly offers no “response to the substantive
issues,” yet asks the Court to deny Plaintiff’s request for a conference because it would somehow
be “an unnecessary waste of the Court’s time.” ECF No. 38 at 1. The Court should reject
Defendants’ transparent delay tactic and order the Defendants to address their discovery
deficiencies immediately.
         Defendants’ only basis for arguing that a conference would be “premature” is that, on Ap

[…]

Open in the archive