EpsteinProject.org

Court records

048_13

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 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF Document 48 Filed 09/06/21 Page 1 of 11




                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                       SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JANE DOE,

                           Plaintiff,
             v.                                      Case No. 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF
DARREN K INDYKE and RICHARD D. KAHN, in
their capacities as executors of THE ESTATE OF
JEFFERY E. EPSTEIN,
                           Defendants.



                    CO-EXECUTORS’ MEMORANDUM OF LAW
                       IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO
                       DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT




                   TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP
                              875 Third Avenue
                          New York, New York 10022
                              Tel: 212-704-6000
                              Fax: 212-704-6288

              Attorneys for Defendants Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn,
                       Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein




119125600
       Case 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF Document 48 Filed 09/06/21 Page 2 of 11




        Defendants Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, Co-Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey

E. Epstein (the “Co-Executors”), respectfully submit this Memorandum of Law in support of their

Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Jane Doe’s (“Plaintiff”) Complaint (ECF No. 1) pursuant to Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

                                PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

        Plaintiff brings a single count against the Co-Executors for Jeffrey Epstein’s (“Epstein”)

alleged violations of Sections 1591, 1593A, 1594(a), and 1594(b) of the Trafficking Victims

Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1591, et seq. (“TVPA”). (Compl. ¶¶ 33, 36.) The Court must dismiss

that claim for two separate reasons.

        First, Plaintiff’s claim must be dismissed because she fails to plead its essential elements.

Plaintiff does not sufficiently allege Epstein’s knowledge or how Doe

[…]

Open in the archive