U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian in Manhattan rejected
arguments by Epstein's former personal lawyer Darren Indyke and
former accountant Richard Kahn that victims cannot pursue a
class action because many agreed not to sue after settling
claims against Epstein's estate.
But the judge put the proposed class action on hold because the
release signed by named plaintiff Danielle Bensky covered her
claims against Indyke and Kahn.
Bensky said she had been an aspiring dancer before being
recruited into Epstein's orbit in 2004.
Subramanian said another plaintiff, Jane Doe 3, may pursue some
claims, and file a motion for class certification "at the right
time and with the right record."
In a statement on behalf of the defendants, Indyke's lawyer
Daniel Weiner said they "emphatically reject" accusations they
knew about or were complicit in Epstein's wrongdoing.
He also said 134 other women awarded more than $121 million from
the estate through a victim compensation fund signed the same
release as Bensky, while more than 50 other women who settled
separately signed "virtually identical" releases.
Sigrid McCawley, a lawyer for the victims, said in a statement:
"We are thrilled with the fact that the Epstein survivors will
proceed against Epstein's right hand money men to hold them
accountable."
Epstein killed himself in a Manhattan jail in August 2019, one
month after being arrested on sex trafficking charges.
His longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell is awaiting an appeals
court decision on whether to overturn her Dec. 2021 conviction
and 20-year prison term for aiding Epstein's abuses.
Victims said Indyke and Kahn helped Epstein create a complex web
of corporations and bank accounts that let him hide his abuses
and pay victims and recruiters, while leaving them "richly
compensated" for their work.
McCawley and another lawyer for the victims, David Boies, helped
obtain $365 million of settlements with JPMorgan Chase and
Deutsche Bank after accusing them of missing red flags about
Epstein, once a lucrative client.
The cases are Bensky et al v Indyke et al, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of New York, No. 24-01204; and Doe 3 v Indyke
et al in the same court, No. 24-02192.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Matthew
Lewis)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All
rights reserved.]
Copyright 2022 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|
|