What legal claims related to Jeffrey Epstein’s activities on Little St. James remain active after the 2023 sale?

1. The headline settlement that shaped the sale proceeds

A November 2022 settlement between Jeffrey Epstein’s estate and the U.S. Virgin Islands required the estate to pay $105 million in cash and to turn over half of the proceeds from any sale of Little St. James to the territorial government; that agreement specifically aimed to finance counseling, victim services and projects for residents affected by alleged trafficking on the island, and it also included a separate small environmental remediation payment for Great St. James ^{[1] [5]}.

2. Sale to Stephen Deckoff didn’t erase civil exposures for the estate

When financier Stephen Deckoff’s SD Investments bought the pair of islands in May 2023, the estate’s executors said sale money would be used to resolve “a number of lawsuits,” meaning the sale was a mechanism to monetize assets rather than a legal capstone that extinguished claims; press statements and estate counsel framed the transfer as part of funding ongoing settlements rather than as litigation closure ^{[6] [2] [7]}.

3. Victim and estate litigation — funds but not finality

Reporting makes clear the 2022 settlement paid the U.S. Virgin Islands and directed funds toward victims and community projects, but it did not purport to end every civil action tied to Epstein’s conduct worldwide; the estate remained the focal point for multiple civil claims and negotiated settlements, and the sale supplied cash and proceeds to be deployed against those liabilities rather than automatically dismissing individual suits ^{[1] [5] [7]}.

4. Third‑party and corporate litigation persisted after the sale

Parallel legal fights that implicate third parties—most prominently litigation and subpoenas targeting financial institutions accused of enabling Epstein’s enterprise—continued through the sale period: the U.S. Virgin Islands and other litigants subpoenaed bank executives and pursued claims that institutions benefited from or facilitated Epstein’s activities, and press coverage in 2023 showed those probes were active even as the islands changed hands ^{[3] [8]}.

5. Criminal evidence and federal inquiries remain distinct from property transfer

Federal investigative activity that produced material from searches of Little St. James after Epstein’s death—reported inventories of hundreds of gigabytes of data and physical evidence—did not terminate because of the sale; law enforcement’s interest in evidence and any criminal referrals derived from that material is separate from civil settlements and property conveyances, and contemporary reporting shows the islands’ sale did not dissolve those evidentiary or investigative streams ^[4].

6. What the reporting does not establish — limits of public record

The available sources make clear the sale supplied funds earmarked by settlement but do not provide a comprehensive docket‑by‑docket accounting of every pending civil claim against the estate or every subpoena outstanding after closing; public reporting documents the USVI settlement, the buyer, and continuing third‑party probes, but it does not catalogue residual private plaintiff suits that may have been resolved confidentially or remain pending beyond the sale ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

Conclusion: a partial legal closure, not a full one

In short, the 2023 sale operationalized terms of the USVI settlement and delivered cash to be used to resolve claims, yet it did not erase the complex web of litigation and investigation tied to Epstein’s activities on Little St. James: the estate remained responsible for settling claims with sale proceeds, third‑party litigation—most notably actions implicating banks—continued, and federal evidence and inquiries persisted irrespective of the change in ownership ^{[1] [6] [3] [4]}.