In Epstein Case Jes Staley Argues To Skip JPM Chase Trial Now Judge Rakoff to Rule by May 31

More here below the fold / paywall line

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell book

SDNY COURTHOUSE, May 19 – J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank were sued for their enabling of Jeffrey Epstein, in lawsuits filed on Thanksgiving 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, where Inner City Press found them in the docket.

  Late on May 17, 2023, plaintiffs' lawyer David Boies selectively announced a $75 million settlement with Deutsche Bank. Nothing was filed in the docket. But the pressure on JPM Chase, and its CEO Dimon, grew.

More including class analysis on Substack here

On May 19, Jes Staley's lawyer argued before Judge Jed S. Rakoff to dismiss JPM Chase's claim against him; Chase opposed. Inner City Press was there, live tweeted thread here:

Staley's lawyer: It's striking that JPM Chase is saying, We're not reponsible but if we are. It's Staley. Indemnification does not apply here - JPMC did things beyond what Staley did.

Staley's lawyer: This alleged vouching by Mr Staley would have been to JPMC's employees. The doesn't identify the harm supposedly caused by Mr Staley to Jane Doe, much less the USVI. Judge Rakoff: I have to limit you to 20 minute, I have a 4 pm [criminal] matter

JPM's lawyer: Doe alleges sexual assault by Staley. But if Staley had done his job, Epstein would not have been a JPM Chase client. We cannot indemnify Staley for criminal acts.

JPM's lawyer: The Madoff case supports us. And it is Congress' purpose to punish traffickers. The question at bar must be answered in our favor.

Staley's lawyer: Bylaws are contractual in nature, the Delaware courts have found, contrary to JPMorgan's argument. Judge Rakoff: They argue they weren't contractually giving up their right to sue you for indemnification.

Staley's lawyer:  Cases don't say that

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

 Staley's lawyer: If they have to re-plead, they should make things clear.

Judge Rakoff: So you know what you're facing. JPM Chase's lawyer Leonard Gail: Let's spend real time on Madoff. Madoff says contribution can be implied. Its language was shorthand- and dicta

JPM's lawyer: The TVPA should not be read to help traffickers. Restatement of Torts, Section 23 - Congress was legislating against it.

 Judge Rakoff: I agree Congressional silence is not a basis for reaching a definitive conclusion. They are talkative.. I am joking

 JPM's lawyer: Even if there was no contribution, supplemental jurisdiction, they can stay in - they have already been present at depositions. It's judicial economy. Judge Rakoff: I've heard what I need.

Judge Rakoff: I'll get you at least a bottom line opinion by the end of this month. Mr Staley should know by May 31. Anything else? No? If you would clear out, I have a 4 pm matter.

More below the fold / paywall line: