Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which civil lawsuits related to Jeffrey Epstein remained active in November 2025 and who are the plaintiffs?
Executive summary
As of November 2025, multiple civil cases tied to Jeffrey Epstein remained in public view — notably lawsuits by an Epstein victim[1] against banks and litigation brought by the U.S. Virgin Islands that produced unsealed documents — but available sources do not supply a single, comprehensive list of every active civil suit or a complete roster of plaintiffs [2] [3]. Major reported actions in November 2025 include proposed class actions filed Oct. 15 by a Florida woman identified as “Jane Doe” against Bank of America and BNY Mellon, and other high‑profile civil litigation (and prior settlements) involving JPMorgan Chase and Deutsche Bank that have produced records and settlements for survivors [2] [3] [4].
1. Banks under fire: victims’ suits vs. Bank of America and BNY Mellon
In mid‑November 2025 Reuters reported that Bank of America and Bank of New York Mellon asked a federal court to dismiss class‑action lawsuits that accuse the banks of “knowingly aiding” Epstein’s trafficking by providing banking services and allegedly ignoring red flags; the suits were described as proposed class actions filed Oct. 15 by one of Epstein’s accusers, a Florida woman identified in reporting as “Jane Doe,” who claims the banks prioritized profit over protecting victims [2]. The Reuters story notes plaintiffs seek to hold banks accountable for failing to file suspicious activity reports and ties these new lawsuits to prior settlements in which other banks paid survivors [2].
2. The U.S. Virgin Islands litigation and document releases
Judge Jed S. Rakoff ordered the unsealing of records in litigation between the U.S. Virgin Islands and JPMorgan Chase that produced emails, suspicious activity reports, and other records — a release which in November 2025 added to the public record about Epstein’s banking relationships and helped spur further reporting [5] [3]. Forbes and Wikipedia reporting reference a 2022 U.S. Virgin Islands suit alleging JPMorgan enabled Epstein’s trafficking; that case produced documents even after a 2023 settlement the reporting says involved a payment but no admission of wrongdoing by JPMorgan [3] [5].
3. Who the plaintiffs are — named survivors and anonymous “Jane Doe” plaintiffs
Coverage in November 2025 identifies two categories of plaintiffs driving civil litigation: named survivors who have filed suits or who are publicly identified in related litigation records (dozens of victims’ names appear across reporting and opinion pieces), and anonymous plaintiffs using “Jane Doe” designations in new proposed class actions — for example, Reuters says a Florida woman known as “Jane Doe” is the named filer in the bank cases [2] [4]. Opinion and news outlets list multiple survivors by name in the broader public discussion (e.g., Courtney Wild, Maria Farmer and others cited in a New York Times piece), but the Reuters story is the clear source identifying the October 15 bank suits’ plaintiff as “Jane Doe” [4] [2].
4. Context: settlements, prior suits and what remains active
Reporting shows earlier litigation produced major settlements — notably a $290 million settlement with JPMorgan Chase and $75 million with Deutsche Bank on behalf of Epstein’s accusers — and those prior resolutions coexist with newer suits seeking discovery or accountability from other banks [2] [3]. Available sources document active litigation or litigation-related court orders in November 2025 (Rakoff’s unsealing order, the newly filed bank class actions), but they do not present a definitive catalogue of every active civil suit against all alleged enablers or third parties as of that month [5] [2] [3].
5. Competing perspectives and legal defenses
Banks named in the new suits have characterized the claims as meritless and said they will vigorously defend themselves; legal experts quoted in press coverage caution that having an unsavory client is not itself illegal, complicating plaintiffs’ path to liability unless they can show banks were complicit or willfully blind to crimes [2] [6]. The Guardian and Reuters pieces emphasize that litigation against financial institutions is legally challenging and may nevertheless produce important documentary disclosure even absent large plaintiff victories [6] [2].
6. Limitations of the record — what reporting does not (yet) show
Available sources do not provide a full enumeration of every civil suit still active in November 2025 nor a comprehensive list of every plaintiff across jurisdictions; the public reporting highlights certain headline cases (the Oct. 15 bank suits, the U.S. Virgin Islands‑JPMorgan matter and prior bank settlements) and names some survivors, but it is silent on many docket‑level details and on whether other suits were pending but unreported [2] [5] [3]. For a court‑level, exhaustive answer one would need to consult court dockets and filings beyond the scope of the cited reportage — those records are not provided in the current sources.
If you want, I can pull the Reuters, Forbes and Rakoff‑related documents cited here into a short docket summary (which plaintiffs are named in each public filing and what relief they seek) based only on these same sources.