JP Morgan And Their Request For A Summary Judgement Against The USVI (Part 1) (8/25/24)

The memorandum of law submitted by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. in Case No. 22-cv-10904 (JSR) seeks partial summary judgment against the Government of the United States Virgin Islands (USVI). Here’s a summary of the key arguments and points presented in the memorandum:1. Basis for Partial Summary Judgment:

• No Direct Evidence of Wrongdoing: JPMorgan argues that there is no direct evidence linking the bank to any alleged wrongdoing regarding Jeffrey Epstein's activities. The bank claims it did not knowingly participate in or benefit from Epstein's criminal conduct.
• Lack of Proximate Cause: The memorandum asserts that the USVI cannot establish proximate cause between JPMorgan’s actions and Epstein's criminal activities. JPMorgan argues that its business relationship with Epstein does not make it liable for his independent illegal acts.

2. Legal Standards and Framework:

• Summary Judgment Standards: The bank outlines the legal standard for summary judgment, emphasizing that such a judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
• Application to Facts: JPMorgan contends that the facts presented do not meet the threshold required to proceed to trial, thereby warranting a summary judgment in its favor.

3. Arguments Against USVI Claims:

• Vicarious Liability: JPMorgan argues that it cannot be held vicariously liable for Epstein’s actions. The bank contends that there is no legal basis to extend liability to the bank for actions taken by Epstein, especially when those actions were criminal in nature.
• Knowledge and Participation: The bank emphasizes that it had no actual knowledge of Epstein's alleged illegal activities and did not participate in or facilitate them. JPMorgan claims any connection to Epstein was purely a banking relationship and not one of criminal conspiracy or complicity.
• Lack of Evidence of Financial Gain from Wrongdoing: JPMorgan also argues that there is no evidence showing that the bank financially benefited from Epstein’s criminal activities. They assert that standard banking fees and services do not equate to complicity in criminal acts.

4. Conclusion and Relief Sought:

• Request for Summary Judgment: The bank requests that the court grant partial summary judgment in its favor, dismissing the claims brought by the USVI to the extent they seek to hold the bank liable for Epstein's criminal conduct.
• Limitation of Liability: JPMorgan seeks to limit its liability, arguing that any potential misconduct on its part is too far removed from Epstein’s actions to warrant legal culpability.

The memorandum thus focuses on challenging the basis of the USVI's claims and emphasizes a lack of direct involvement or knowledge of Epstein's criminal behavior by the bank, seeking a court ruling to dismiss or limit the scope of the claims against it.


(commercial at 7:50)

to contact me:

bobbycapucci@protonmail.com





gov.uscourts.nysd.591653.223.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)