JPMorgan Opposes Disqualification of Lawyers in Epstein Case

Lawyers representing JPMorgan Chase & Co. in a lawsuit accusing it of benefiting from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking accused an attorney for an Epstein victim of “gamesmanship” in trying to disqualify the bank’s legal team from the case at the 11th hour.

(Bloomberg) — Lawyers representing JPMorgan Chase & Co. in a lawsuit accusing it of benefiting from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking accused an attorney for an Epstein victim of “gamesmanship” in trying to disqualify the bank’s legal team from the case at the 11th hour. 

WilmerHale said the motion to disqualify the firm from acting for JPMorgan in the proposed class action was “improper,” “nonsensical” and “lacks merit.” Bradley Edwards, a lawyer representing the Jane Doe victim suing the bank, asked a federal judge on May 4 to exclude WilmerHale from the case over an alleged conflict of interest. 

“Mr. Edwards’ efforts to remove an adversary from the case at this advanced stage based on a non-existing conflict would cause JPMC severe hardship and prejudice by denying JPMC its counsel of choice,” WilmerHale wrote in a response filed Monday. 

Epstein Victim Seeks to Disqualify JPMorgan Defense Lawyers

Edwards argued WilmerHale had a conflict because it previously represented ECPAT-USA, an anti-trafficking policy group that filed an amicus brief on behalf of Epstein victim Courtney Wild, who sued Epstein in federal court in Florida. Wild sued to set aside an agreement that immunized Epstein from federal prosecution.

WilmerHale denied the conflict, arguing that no former or current client had sought its disqualification for the current litigation and that Wild was never a client anyway.

WilmerHale and Edwards are sparring in lengthy litigation over the financial services JPMorgan provided Epstein between 1998 and 2013, before the bank dropped him as a client. Doe argues the bank knew or had a reckless disregard for the fact Epstein was using his bank accounts to aid his sex-trafficking operation. 

Another Epstein victim, also identified as Jane Doe, is suing Deutsche Bank AG, which counted Epstein as a client between 2013 and 2018. 

Epstein’s relationship with former JPMorgan executive Jes Staley has emerged as a key point in Doe’s case against the bank. Allegations that Staley knew about Epstein’s sex trafficking prompted the bank to file its own lawsuit against Staley, arguing he should be held responsible for any damages awarded against JPMorgan. 

In a separate filing Monday, JPMorgan urged US District Judge Jed Rakoff to reject Staley’s attempt to have that lawsuit thrown out. Lawyers for the bank argued they’d made sufficient allegations to support claims Staley breached his duty to JPMorgan in vouching for Epstein, despite knowing about his sex-trafficking operation. 

“Staley not only concealed that information, but thwarted any efforts within JPMC to sever ties with Epstein,” the lawyers wrote in a filing. 

Staley has previously denied having any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and claimed the bank was trying to make him a scapegoat. 

The cases are Jane Doe 1 v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, 22-cv-10019; Jane Doe 1 v. Deutsche Bank, 22-cv-10018, and USVI v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, 22-cv-10904-UA, US District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

(Adds opposition to proposed dismissal of lawsuit against Staley)

More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.