Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSep 15: Doe vs. Donald J. Trump: Parties to appear in court 4 status conference (GD 16)
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
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
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
11 replies, 12553 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
11 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sep 15: Doe vs. Donald J. Trump: Parties to appear in court 4 status conference (GD 16) (Original Post)
Her Sister
Jul 2016
OP
Why Isn’t Anyone Paying Attention to the Sexual Assault Lawsuit Against Trump?
Her Sister
Jul 2016
#1
Whaaaa . . . you mean Trump has to appear in court on these rape charges or a 13-year-old?
brush
Jul 2016
#3
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)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 comedians 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 Cosbys 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. Trumps alleged victim, who filed the lawsuit, claims she was a thirteen-year-old child when the assault happened, while Cosbys was a grown woman. Trumps alleged attack was overtly violent, while Cosbys was not. And the claims against Trump come with someone claiming to be an eyewitness, while Cosbys 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:
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. Trumps alleged victim, who filed the lawsuit, claims she was a thirteen-year-old child when the assault happened, while Cosbys was a grown woman. Trumps alleged attack was overtly violent, while Cosbys was not. And the claims against Trump come with someone claiming to be an eyewitness, while Cosbys 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
(7,773 posts)2. But what about...
...Hillary's emails!
Loki
(3,825 posts)10. Did you forget this
brush
(53,778 posts)3. Whaaaa . . . you mean Trump has to appear in court on these rape charges or a 13-year-old?
It this true?
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)5. Think only both parties counsel has to...
femmocrat
(28,394 posts)4. K & R
Sounds like a media field day!
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)6. Not being reported much, see post 1
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)7. KnR!
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)8. Wow, so this story really does have legs!
Guess the news will start reporting about it after 11/8.
renate
(13,776 posts)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
(67,782 posts)11. It was September 9, not 15: