EpsteinProject.org

Court records

2021.04.13_Reply_Motion_1

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.

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
  OFTHE VIRGIN ISLANDS



   FILED
 Ap ril 1 3,   2021
 ST-20 2 0-CV-00155
 TAMARA CHARLES
CLERK OF THE COURT
                                    IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
                                         DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN

                                                                        CIVIL CASE NO.: ST-2020-CV-00155

               GHISLAINE MAXWELL,

                                Plaintiff,

               vs.

               ESTATE OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN,
               DARREN K. INDYKE, in his capacity as
               EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JEFFREY
               E. EPSTEIN, RICHARD D. KAHN, in his
               capacity as EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE
               OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and NES, LLC, a
               New York Limited Liability Company,

                           Defendants.
               ________________________________________

                                    PLAINTIFF’S REPLY TO CO-EXECUTORS’ BRIEF
                                        PURSUANT TO MARCH 17, 2021 ORDER

                         Plaintiff, GHISLAINE MAXWELL (hereinafter, “Plaintiff”), pursuant to this Court’s

               Order dated March 17, 2021, hereby files her reply to the brief filed on March 29, 2021 by Co-

               Executors Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (the “Co-Executors”). In short, Plaintiff

               agrees that the Court should not designate this matter complex or assign the case to the judge

               assigned to Case No. ST-2020-CV-00014, Government of the Virgin Islands v. Darren K.

               Indyke, et al. (the “CICO action”).

                         First, this action for indemnification does not meet the Complex Litigation Division’s

               assignment criteria. Plainly, this case does not “require[] exceptional judicial management to

               avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the court or the litigants and to expedi

[…]

Open in the archive