Jeffrey Epstein and Donald J. Trump, Co-Defendants

16 min readJul 7, 2019

One place where Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey Epstein definitely come together is as co-defendants in a historic law suit, filed twice in federal court and withdrawn both times due to credible death threats made to the complainant and her family, the last time being literally upon the eve of the 2016 election:

The “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FALSE IMPRISONMENT, AND DEFAMATION” against Jeffrey Epstein and Donald J. Trump that was brought to court twice and withdrawn twice due to credible death threats made against the complainant and her family:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -

JANE DOE, proceeding under a pseudonym, Plaintiff,

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.

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

and belief, predatory sexual assault) detailed herein are unlawful under New York law, e.g., NY Penal L § 130.20–130.52, and 130.55–130.65 (and, on information and belief, 130.95) and constitute the torts of, inter alia, assault, battery, false imprisonment, and intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress, including threats of force and serious bodily harm, under New York law. In addition, 18 U.S. Code § 2255 provides Plaintiff with a civil remedy for personal injuries because Plaintiff, while a minor, was a victim of violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591, 2421, 2422(b), and 2423(a) and she suffered personal injury as a result of such violations. Declaration of Plaintiff Jane Doe, Exhibit A hereto; Declaration of Tiffany Doe, Exhibit B hereto; Declaration of Joan Doe, Exhibit C hereto; Jane Doe, Tiffany Doe, and Joan Doe are each pseudonyms as each woman wishes anonymity. Tiffany Doe, a witness, was an employee of Defendant Epstein. Exh. B. Joan Doe, a witness, was a childhood classmate of Plaintiff who, in the 1994–95 school year, was told by Plaintiff that Plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994. Exh. C.

8. Courts have discretion to allow proceeding anonymously where the need for privacy outweighs the public’s interest in knowing their identity and any prejudice to the defendants. Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185, 189 (2d Cir. 2008). This litigation involves matters that are highly sensitive and of a personal nature, and identification of Plaintiff would pose a risk of retaliatory physical harm to her and to others. Exh. A. All of the ten factors that the Second Circuit articulated as relevant to this analysis favor anonymity, especially factors 1–4, 7, and 10 (e.g., factors one and two: “whether the litigation involves

matters that are ‘highly sensitive and [of a] personal nature,’” and “’whether identification poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to the … party [seeking to proceed anonymously] or

even more critically, to innocent non-parties’”.), or are neutral with respect to anonymity. Protecting Plaintiff’s anonymity is also appropriate as she is a rape victim.

9. Plaintiff was enticed by promises of money and a modeling career to attend a series of parties, with other similarly situated minor females, held at a New York City residence that was being used by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein. At least four of the parties were attended by Defendant Trump. Exhs. A and B. On information and belief, by this time in 1994, Defendant Trump had known Defendant Epstein for seven years (New York, 10/28/02, “’I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,’’ Trump booms from a speakerphone. ‘He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.’”), and knew that Plaintiff was then just 13 years old. Exhs. A and B.

10. Defendant Trump initiated sexual contact with Plaintiff at four different parties.

On the fourth and final sexual encounter with Defendant Trump, Defendant Trump tied Plaintiff to a bed, exposed himself to Plaintiff, and then proceeded to forcibly rape Plaintiff. During the course of this savage sexual attack, Plaintiff loudly pleaded with Defendant Trump to stop but with no effect. Defendant Trump responded to Plaintiff’s pleas by violently striking Plaintiff in the face with his open hand and screaming that he would do whatever he wanted. Exhs. A and B.

11. Immediately following this rape, Defendant Trump threatened Plaintiff that, were she ever to reveal any of the details of the sexual and physical abuse of her by Defendant Trump, Plaintiff and her family would be physically harmed if not killed. Exhs. A and B.

12. Defendant Epstein had sexual contact with Plaintiff at two of the parties. The second sexual encounter with Defendant Epstein took place after Plaintiff had been raped by

Defendant Trump. Defendant Epstein forced himself upon Plaintiff and proceeded to rape her anally and vaginally despite her loud pleas to stop. Defendant Epstein then attempted to strike Plaintiff about the head with his closed fists while he angrily screamed at Plaintiff that he, Defendant Epstein, rather than Defendant Trump, should have been the one who took Plaintiff’s virginity, before Plaintiff finally managed to break away from Defendant Epstein. Exhs. A and B.

13. The threats of violence against Plaintiff and her family continued, this time from Defendant Epstein, who again reiterated that Plaintiff was not to reveal any of the details of his sexual and physical abuse of her or else, specifically, Plaintiff and her family would be seriously physically harmed, if not killed. Exhs. A and B.

14. While still under threats of physical harm by coming forward and having no reason to believe that the threats have ever been lifted or would ever be lifted, Plaintiff, who has suffered from stress, emotional distress, mental pain and suffering, among other problems, ever since the assaults, was subjected to daily painful reminders of the horrific acts of one of the perpetrators, Defendant Trump, via mass media coverage of him starting on or about June 16, 2015 that, over a short period of time, became continuous and unavoidable. Exh. A.

15. As a direct and proximate result of the sexual assaults and rapes perpetrated by Defendants upon her, Plaintiff has suffered stress, emotional distress, and mental pain and suffering, as well as adverse physical consequences.

16. As a direct and proximate result of the sexual assaults and rapes perpetrated by Defendants upon her, Plaintiff has suffered physical pain and suffering.

17. As a direct and proximate result of the sexual assaults and rapes perpetrated by Defendants upon her, Plaintiff has been subjected to public scorn, hatred, and ridicule and has suffered threats against her life and physical safety.

18. As a direct and proximate result of the sexual assaults and rapes perpetrated by Defendants upon her, Plaintiff has incurred special damages, including medical and legal expenses.

19. The sexual assaults and rapes perpetrated by Defendants upon Plaintiff were intentional acts.

20. The conduct of Defendants demonstrates willful, reckless and intentional conduct that raises a conscious indifference to consequences.

21. At the appropriate time in this litigation, Plaintiff shall amend her complaint to assert a claim for punitive damages against Defendants in order to punish Defendants for their actions and to deter Defendants from repeating their conduct.

TOLLING OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

22. Any statute of limitations applicable to rape, sexual misconduct, criminal sexual acts, sexual abuse, forcible touching, assault, battery, intentional and reckless infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment of a minor, if any, is tolled owing to the continuous and active duress imposed upon Plaintiff by Defendants that effectively robbed Plaintiff of her free will to commence legal action until the present time. Cullen v. Margiotta, 811 F.2d 698, 722 (2nd Cir.1987); Ross v. United States, 574 F. Supp. 536, 542 (S.D.N.Y. 1983). More particularly, Plaintiff was unrelentingly threatened by each Defendant that, were she ever to reveal any of the details of the sexual and physical abuse caused to her by Defendants, Plaintiff

and her family would be physically harmed if not killed. The duress has not terminated and the fear has not subsided. The duress is an element of or inherent in the underlying causes of action complained of herein. The duress and coercion exerted by Defendants has been such as to have actually deprived Plaintiff of her freedom of will to institute suit earlier in time, and it rose to such a level that a person of reasonable firmness in Plaintiff’s situation would have been unable to resist. Exhs. A and B.

23. Both Defendants let Plaintiff know that each was a very wealthy, powerful man and indicated that they had the power, ability and means to carry out their threats. Indeed, Defendant Trump stated that Plaintiff shouldn’t ever say anything if she didn’t want to disappear like Maria, a 12-year-old female that was forced to be involved in the third incident with Defendant Trump and that Plaintiff had not seen since that third incident, and that he was capable of having her whole family killed. Exhs. A and B.

24. The duress had prevented Plaintiff from starting litigation before this year.

However, as soon as she surfaced, she received threats. More specifically, shortly after her first complaint was filed in California on April 26, 2016, she started receiving threatening phone calls on her cell phone. Exh. A.

25. Defendants are equitably estopped from arguing that any statute of limitations has not been tolled as Defendants wrongfully forced Plaintiff to refrain from timely commencing this action by threats, duress, and other misconduct. Exhs. A and B. Zimmerman v. Poly Prep Country Day School, F.Supp.2d (2012), 2012 WL 3683393; General Stencils, Inc. v. Chippa, 18 N.Y.2d 125, 127 (1966)(“a wrongdoer should not be able to take refuge behind the shield of his own wrongdoing.”).

26. Moreover, this action has been brought before the facts giving rise to the estoppel have ceased to be operational (i.e., while still under threats of physical harm by coming forward and having no reason to believe that the threats have ever been lifted or would ever be lifted) and since Plaintiff has decided to seek redress at this time, Plaintiff seeks an order of protection in favor of Plaintiff and all associated with her so as to protect them from harm and harassment from Defendants and their agents and associates. Exh. A.

DEFAMATION

27. On information and belief, on or about April 28, 2016, Defendant Trump provided the following statement to American Media, Inc. and/or Radar Online LLC for publication on at least their website RadarOnline.com regarding Plaintiff’s complaint ED CV 16- 797-DMG (KSx) filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California: “The allegations are not only categorically false, but disgusting at the highest level and clearly framed to solicit media attention or, perhaps, are simply politically motivated. There is absolutely no merit to these allegations. Period.” The statement provided for publication by Defendant Trump was published by said website and has been republished elsewhere in whole or in part numerous times (and similar statements of an attorney for Defendant Trump were also published, including on September 22, 2016 by Courthouse News Service). The statements provided for publication by Defendant Trump and his agent and that were published by said websites are false as they pertain to Plaintiff.

28. The published statements are libelous on their face, and clearly expose Plaintiff to hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy.

29. As a proximate result of the above-described publications, Plaintiff has suffered loss of her reputation, shame, mortification, and injury to her feelings, all to her damage in an amount to be established by proof at trial.

30. The above-described publications were not privileged because they were published by Defendant Trump and his agent with malice, hatred and ill will toward Plaintiff and the desire to injure her.

31. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Trump’s defamation of Plaintiff, Plaintiff has been subjected to public scorn, hatred, and ridicule and has suffered other injury.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants and for the following relief:

A. That judgment be entered against Defendants for special damages, compensatory damages, and punitive damages in an amount which shall be shown to be reasonable and just by the evidence and in excess of Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), exclusive of interests and costs;

B. That all costs of this action be assessed against Defendants, including all reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and expenses of this action;

C. That an order of protection in favor of Plaintiff and all associated with her be issued so as to protect them from harm and harassment from Defendants and their agents and associates; and

D. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of all issues properly triable by jury in this action.

Dated: September 30, 2016 Respectfully submitted,

Of Counsel:

J. Cheney Mason

Law Office of J. Cheney Mason, P.A. 250 Park Avenue South, Suite 200 Winter Park, Florida 32789

/s/ Thomas Francis Meagher Thomas Francis Meagher SDNY Bar Code TM6707

One Palmer Square Princeton, New Jersey 08542 Telephone: (609) 558–1500

tmeagher@thomasfmeagheresq.com

JS 44C/SDNY REV. 2/2016

Case 1:16-cv-07673 DocCuIVmILeCnOtV1E-R1SHFEEilTed 09/30/16 Page 1 of 2

The JS-44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet.

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Jane Doe, proceeding under a pseudonym Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey E. Epstein

ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)

Thomas Francis Meagher, Esq.

One Palmer Square Princeton, NJ 08542

609–558–1500

CAUSE OF ACTION (CITE THE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WHICH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE) (DO NOT CITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY)

28 U.S.C. § 1332, 1391: RAPE, SEXUAL MISCONDUCT, CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS, SEXUAL ABUSE, FORCIBLE TOUCHING, ASSAUL

No Yes

Has this action, case, or proceeding, or one essentially the same been previously filed in SDNY at any time? Judge Previously Assigned

If yes, was this case Vol. Invol. Dismissed. No Yes If yes, give date & Case No.

IS THIS AN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CASE? No Yes

(PLACE AN [x] IN ONE BOX ONLY) NATURE OF SUIT

TORTS

ACTIONS UNDER STATUTES

CONTRACT

PERSONAL INJURY

[ ] 367 HEALTHCARE/

FORFEITURE/PENALTY

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER STATUTES

[ ] 110 INSURANCE

[ ] 310 AIRPLANE

PHARMACEUTICAL PERSONAL [ ] 625 DRUG RELATED

[ ] 422 APPEAL

[ ] 375 FALSE CLAIMS

[ ] 120 MARINE

[ ] 130 MILLER ACT

[ ] 140 NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT

[ ] 150 RECOVERY OF OVERPAYMENT & ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT

[ ] 151 MEDICARE ACT

[ ] 152 RECOVERY OF DEFAULTED STUDENT LOANS (EXCL VETERANS)

[ ] 153 RECOVERY OF OVERPAYMENT OF VETERAN’S BENEFITS

[ ] 160 STOCKHOLDERS SUITS

[ ] 190 OTHER CONTRACT

[ ] 195 CONTRACT PRODUCT LIABILITY

[ ] 196 FRANCHISE

[ ] 315 AIRPLANE PRODUCT LIABILITY

[ ] 320 ASSAULT, LIBEL & SLANDER

[ ] 330 FEDERAL

EMPLOYERS’ LIABILITY

[ ] 340 MARINE

[ ] 345 MARINE PRODUCT LIABILITY

[ ] 350 MOTOR VEHICLE [ ] 355 MOTOR VEHICLE

PRODUCT LIABILITY [ ] 360 OTHER PERSONAL

INJURY

[ ] 362 PERSONAL INJURY — MED MALPRACTICE

ACTIONS UNDER STATUTES CIVIL RIGHTS

INJURY/PRODUCT LIABILITY [ ] 365 PERSONAL INJURY

PRODUCT LIABILITY

[ ] 368 ASBESTOS PERSONAL INJURY PRODUCT LIABILITY

PERSONAL PROPERTY

[ ] 370 OTHER FRAUD

[ ] 371 TRUTH IN LENDING

[ ] 380 OTHER PERSONAL

PROPERTY DAMAGE [ ] 385 PROPERTY DAMAGE

PRODUCT LIABILITY

PRISONER PETITIONS

[ ] 463 ALIEN DETAINEE [ ] 510 MOTIONS TO

VACATE SENTENCE 28 USC 2255

[ ] 530 HABEAS CORPUS [ ] 535 DEATH PENALTY

SEIZURE OF PROPERTY 21 USC 881

[ ] 690 OTHER

LABOR

[ ] 710 FAIR LABOR

STANDARDS ACT [ ] 720 LABOR/MGMT

RELATIONS

[ ] 740 RAILWAY LABOR ACT

[ ] 751 FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE ACT (FMLA)

[ ] 790 OTHER LABOR

LITIGATION

28 USC 158

[ ] 423 WITHDRAWAL

28 USC 157

PROPERTY RIGHTS

[ ] 820 COPYRIGHTS [ ] 830 PATENT

[ ] 840 TRADEMARK

SOCIAL SECURITY

[ ] 861 HIA (1395ff)

[ ] 862 BLACK LUNG (923)

[ ] 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) [ ] 864 SSID TITLE XVI

[ ] 865 RSI (405(g))

FEDERAL TAX SUITS

[ ] 870 TAXES (U.S. Plaintiff or Defendant)

[ ] 871 IRS-THIRD PARTY

[ ] 376 QUI TAM

[ ] 400 STATE

REAPPORTIONMENT [ ] 410 ANTITRUST

[ ] 430 BANKS & BANKING [ ] 450 COMMERCE

[ ] 460 DEPORTATION

[ ] 470 RACKETEER INFLU- ENCED & CORRUPT ORGANIZATION ACT (RICO)

[ ] 480 CONSUMER CREDIT

[ ] 490 CABLE/SATELLITE TV

[ ] 850 SECURITIES/

COMMODITIES/ EXCHANGE

[ ] 890 OTHER STATUTORY ACTIONS

[ ] 891 AGRICULTURAL ACTS

[ ] 893 ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

REAL PROPERTY

[ ] 440 OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS [ ] 540 MANDAMUS & OTHER

(Non-Prisoner) [ ] 441 VOTING

[ ] 791 EMPL RET INC

SECURITY ACT (ERISA)

IMMIGRATION

26 USC 7609

[ ] 895 FREEDOM OF

INFORMATION ACT [ ] 896 ARBITRATION

[ ] 899 ADMINISTRATIVE

[ ] 210 LAND

CONDEMNATION

[ ] 220 FORECLOSURE

[ ] 230 RENT LEASE & EJECTMENT

[ ] 442 EMPLOYMENT

[ ] 443 HOUSING/

ACCOMMODATIONS [ ] 445 AMERICANS WITH

DISABILITIES -

PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS

[ ] 550 CIVIL RIGHTS

[ ] 555 PRISON CONDITION [ ] 560 CIVIL DETAINEE

[ ] 462 NATURALIZATION

APPLICATION

[ ] 465 OTHER IMMIGRATION ACTIONS

PROCEDURE ACT/REVIEW OR APPEAL OF AGENCY DECISION

[ ] 950 CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATE STATUTES

[ ] 240 TORTS TO LAND

[ ] 245 TORT PRODUCT LIABILITY

[ ] 290 ALL OTHER REAL PROPERTY

EMPLOYMENT

[ ] 446 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES -OTHER

[ ] 448 EDUCATION

CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT

Check if demanded in complaint:

CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DO YOU CLAIM THIS CASE IS RELATED TO A CIVIL CASE NOW PENDING IN S.D.N.Y.? UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 IF SO, STATE:

DEMAND $ OTHER JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

Check YES only if demanded in complaint

JURY DEMAND: YES NO NOTE: You must also submit at the time of filing the Statement of Relatedness form (Form IH-32).

(PLACE AN x IN ONE BOX ONLY)

ORIGIN

1 Original o 2

Removed from

o 3

Remanded

4 Reinstated or

5 Transferred from

Multidistrict

7 Appeal to District

Proceeding

State Court

all parties represented

At least one party is pro se.

from Appellate Court

Reopened

(Specify District)

Litigation

Judge from Magistrate Judge Judgment

(PLACE AN x IN ONE BOX ONLY) BASIS OF JURISDICTION IF DIVERSITY, INDICATE

1 U.S. PLAINTIFF 2 U.S. DEFENDANT 3 FEDERAL QUESTION 4 DIVERSITY

(U.S. NOT A PARTY)

CITIZENSHIP BELOW.

CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (FOR DIVERSITY CASES ONLY)

(Place an [X] in one box for Plaintiff and one box for Defendant)

CITIZEN OF THIS STATE

PTF

[ ] 1

DEF

[ ] 1

CITIZEN OR SUBJECT OF A

PTF DEF

[ ] 3 [ ] 3

INCORPORATED and PRINCIPAL PLACE

PTF

[ ] 5

DEF

[ ] 5

FOREIGN COUNTRY

OF BUSINESS IN ANOTHER STATE

CITIZEN OF ANOTHER STATE

[ ] 2

INCORPORATED or PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IN THIS STATE

[ ] 4 [ ] 4

FOREIGN NATION

[ ] 6

PLAINTIFF(S) ADDRESS(ES) AND COUNTY(IES)

California (Plaintiff may be reached through her attorney)

DEFENDANT(S) ADDRESS(ES) AND COUNTY(IES)

Donald J. Trump: 725 5th Ave., New York, New York; New York County Jeffrey E. Epstein: 9 E. 71st St., New York, New York; New York County

DEFENDANT(S) ADDRESS UNKNOWN

REPRESENTATION IS HEREBY MADE THAT, AT THIS TIME, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE, WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE, TO ASCERTAIN THE RESIDENCE ADDRESSES OF THE FOLLOWING DEFENDANTS:

Check one: THIS ACTION SHOULD BE ASSIGNED TO: WHITE PLAINS MANHATTAN

(DO NOT check either box if this a PRISONER PETITION/PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT.)

[ ] NO

DATE September 3SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN THIS DISTRICT

RECEIPT #

/s/Thomas Francis Meagher

[ ] YES (DATE ADMITTED Mo.October

Attorney Bar Code # TM6707

Yr. 1988 )

Magistrate Judge is to be designated by the Clerk of the Court.

Magistrate Judge is so Designated. Ruby J. Krajick, Clerk of Court by Deputy Clerk, DATED .

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT (NEW YORK SOUTHERN)

Clear Form Save Print

United States District Court

for the

Southern District of New York

Related Case Statement

Full Caption of Later Filed Case:

JANE DOE, proceeding under a pseudonym,

Defendant

Full Caption of Earlier Filed Case:

(including in bankruptcy appeals the relevant adversary proceeding)

JANE DOE, proceeding under a pseudonym,

Defendant

Page 1

Status of Earlier Filed Case:

____

Closed

(If so, set forth the procedure which resulted in closure, e.g., voluntary dismissal, settlement, court decision. Also, state whether there is an appeal pending.)

____

Open (If so, set forth procedural status and summarize any court rulings.)

The plaintiff in the earlier filed case filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, without prejudice to refiling the complaint.

Explain in detail the reasons for your position that the newly filed case is related to the earlier filed case.

Both actions concern the identical parties, property, transactions and events; and there is complete, identical factual overlap.

Signature:

/s/ Thomas Francis Meagher