Sep 15: Doe vs. Donald J. Trump: Parties to appear in court 4 status conference (GD 16)

[Her Sister]

The judge assigned to the case has ordered the parties appear in court for a "status conference."

DONALD J. TRUMP and JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN,

Defendants.

RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge:

USDC-SDNY
DOC#:
DATE FILED: 6/30/2016
No. 16-CV-4642 (RA)
ORDER AND NOTICE OF INITIAL CONFERENCE

It is hereby:

ORDERED that counsel for all parties appear for an initial status conference on

September 9, 2016 at 3:15 p.m. in Courtroom 1506 of the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York, 40 Foley Square, New York,
New York.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, by September 2, 2016, the parties
jointly submit to the

Court a proposed case management plan and scheduling order."

All parties must also submit a letter to the court:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, by September 2, 2016, the parties submit a
joint letter, not to exceed five (5) pages, providing the following
information in separate paragraphs:

1.A brief description of the nature of the action and the principal defenses

thereto;

2. A brief explanation of why jurisdiction and venue lie in this Court. If any
party is a corporation, the letter shall state both the place of incorporation
and the principal place of business. If any party is a partnership, limited
partnership, limited liability company or trust, the letter shall state the
citizenship of each of the entity's members, shareholders, partners and/or
trustees;
3. A brief description of all contemplated and/or outstanding motions and
how such motions may affect scheduling in this matter;
4. A brief description of any discovery that has already taken place, and/or
that which will be necessary for the parties to engage in meaningful
settlement negotiations;

5. A brief description of prior settlement discussions (without disclosing the
parties' offers or settlement positions) and the prospect of settlement;
6. The estimated length of trial; and
7. Any other information that the parties believe may assist the Court in
advancing the case to settlement or trial, including, but not limited to, a
description of any dispositive issue or novel issue raised by the case.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, by September 2, 2016, the parties jointly submit to the
Court a proposed case management plan and scheduling order. A template for the order is
available at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judge/Abrams. The status letter and the proposed case
management plan should be filed electronically on ECF, consistent with Section 13 .1 of the
Court's Electronic Case Filing (ECF) Rules & Instructions, available at
http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/ecf/ecf_rules _ 080113 .pdf.
Plaintiff is ordered to serve Defendants with a copy of this order and to file an affidavit
on ECF certifying that such service has been effectuated.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 30, 2016
New York, New York
Ronnie Abrams
United States District Judge

https://timinhonolulu.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/20160630-7-order-and-notice-of-initial-conference.pdf

Case 1:16-cv-04642-RA Document 1 Filed 06/20/16 Page 1 of 9


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------- JANE DOE, proceeding under a pseudonym, Plaintiff, v. DONALD J. TRUMP and JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Defendants. ))))))))) Case No.: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ---------------------------------------------------------------
COMPLAINT FOR RAPE, SEXUAL MISCONDUCT, CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS, SEXUAL ABUSE, FORCIBLE TOUCHING, ASSAULT, BATTERY, INTENTIONAL AND RECKLESS INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, DURESS, FALSE IMPRISONMENT, AND DEFAMATION
______________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiff Jane Doe, proceeding under a pseudonym, brings this action against Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey E. Epstein, and alleges that:
PARTIES
1.

Plaintiff is an individual residing in and a citizen of the State of California.
2.

Upon information and belief, Defendants Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey E. Epstein each reside in this District and are citizens of the State of New York.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.

Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of California for purposes of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
4.

Defendants are citizens of the State of New York for purposes of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332

https://www.scribd.com/doc/316386913/Doe-V-Donald-Trump

Case 1:16-cv-04642-RA Document 1 Filed 06/20/16 Page 2 of 9

5.

This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction with respect to this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 as there exists complete diversity of citizenship between Plaintiff and Defendants and the amount in controversy exceeds Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs.
6.

Defendants are each subject to the jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 with proper venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 as both defendants are residents of and/or are domiciled in this district and the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this district.
RAPE, SEXUAL MISCONDUCT, CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS, SEXUAL ABUSE, FORCIBLE TOUCHING, ASSAULT, BATTERY, INTENTIONAL AND RECKLESS INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, DURESS, AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT
7.

Plaintiff was subject to acts of rape, sexual misconduct, criminal sexual acts, sexual abuse, forcible touching, assault, battery, intentional and reckless infliction of emotional distress, duress, false imprisonment, and threats of death and/or serious bodily injury by the Defendants that took place at several parties during the summer months of 1994. The parties were held by Defendant Epstein at a New York City residence that was being used by Defendant Epstein at 9 E. 71st St. in Manhattan. During this period, Plaintiff was a minor of age 13 and was legally incapable under New York law of consenting to sexual intercourse and the other sexual contacts detailed herein. NY Penal L § 130.05(3)(a). The rapes in the first, second, and third degrees; sexual misconduct; criminal sexual acts in the first, second, and third degrees; sexual abuse in the first, second, and third degrees; and forcible touching (and, on information
Case 1:16-cv-04642-RA Document 1 Filed 06/20/16 Page 2 of 9

https://www.scribd.com/doc/316386913/Doe-V-Donald-Trump

[Her Sister]

1. Why Isn’t Anyone Paying Attention to the Sexual Assault Lawsuit Against Trump?

In two weeks, Bill Cosby will be formally arraigned in the case Commonwealth v. William Henry Cosby. The world will be watching, but not out of true suspense. Most people will follow the case expecting to hear lurid details about the comedian’s alleged sex crimes, and will follow the trial to see the spectacle of a beloved entertainer hitting rock bottom. At the same time, Doe v. Donald J. Trump, a federal civil case for sexual assault, will proceed against Republican frontrunner Donald Trump (if a judge decides not to dismiss it). That case, though, is unlikely to receive even a fraction of the media and public attention that Cosby’s case will.

The disparity in public perception between the Cosby and Trump cases is fascinating. From a purely legal standpoint, the allegations against Trump are way worse than the ones against Cosby. Trump’s alleged victim, who filed the lawsuit, claims she was a thirteen-year-old child when the assault happened, while Cosby’s was a grown woman. Trump’s alleged attack was overtly violent, while Cosby’s was not. And the claims against Trump come with someone claiming to be an eyewitness, while Cosby’s does not. In fact, everything from procedure to substance weighs as badly, if not worse, against Trump as it does against Cosby. But, strangely, I even find the case against Trump hard to believe.

Just to examine a few aspects of the cases:

Statutes of Limitation:

Continues in link: http://lawnewz.com/celebrity/why-isnt-anyone-paying-attention-to-the-sexual-assault-lawsuit-against-trump/

[orwell]

2. But what about...

...Hillary's emails!

[Loki]

10. Did you forget this

[brush]

3. Whaaaa . . . you mean Trump has to appear in court on these rape charges or a 13-year-old?

It this true?

[Her Sister]

5. Think only both parties counsel has to...

[femmocrat]

4. K & R

Sounds like a media field day!

[Her Sister]

6. Not being reported much, see post 1

[Her Sister]

7. KnR!

[MoonRiver]

8. Wow, so this story really does have legs!

Guess the news will start reporting about it after 11/8.

[renate]

9. when I Googled "trump court september 15," this thread is the first thing that came up

And essentially the only thing. Nothing from the MSM.

So I'm wondering whether this is actually true (although the document certainly reads as though it's for real), and if it is, where the heck are the media? These accusations would seem to be catnip.

[George II]

11. It was September 9, not 15:

http://heavy.com/news/2016/09/donald-trump-child-rape-sex-assault-federal-lawsuit-next-court-date-october-14-new-york-victim-judge/