Which new plaintiffs filed lawsuits against Jeffrey Epstein’s estate after 2023 and what claims did they raise?

1. Who filed suits after 2023: victims as a continuing plaintiff class, not a single headline name

After 2023 the most visible new litigation against the estate has been brought on behalf of groups of survivors—represented by prominent plaintiff firms—including a potential class action against the estate’s co-executors, Richard Kahn and Darren Indyke, alleging those co-executors “aided, abetted and facilitated” Epstein’s sex trafficking and therefore should not be allowed to profit from estate assets intended to compensate victims ^{[3] [2]}. News outlets and filings emphasize collective litigation by survivors rather than identifying a long list of new individual plaintiffs in the public reporting available ^[3].

2. What the new plaintiffs are claiming: aiding/abetting, facilitation, and fiduciary breach

The central legal theory advanced in the most prominent post-2023 suits is that the estate’s co-executors personally aided and abetted Epstein’s trafficking—claims that, if proven, would allow victims to pierce executor protections, recover against individual executors, and prevent the estate’s unnamed beneficiaries from receiving windfalls ^{[2] [3]}. Separate but related civil claims in earlier and parallel litigation include sex trafficking, fraud, conspiracy, and civil RICO-style allegations pursued by the U.S. Virgin Islands government; that government suit was settled for $105 million in late 2022 but illustrates the range of statutory theories that survivors and public plaintiffs have used against the estate and related entities ^{[1] [4]}.

3. Who else sued or was threatened: institutional and governmental litigation that reshaped the post-2023 landscape

Beyond survivor plaintiffs, institutions and governments pressed claims tied to the estate’s finances: Deutsche Bank settled related claims in 2023, and the U.S. Virgin Islands pursued a civil enforcement case that culminated in the late-2022 settlement and the return of tax benefits—actions that helped narrow the estate’s resources even as new suits sought to reach remaining assets such as a large IRS tax refund reported in 2025 ^{[5] [1] [3]}. Reporting frames those institutional suits as complementary pressure points that influence what private plaintiffs can realistically recover from the estate ^{[5] [6]}.

4. What’s unresolved and why names and counts are murky in public reports

Public reporting repeatedly emphasizes litigation themes and lead counsel (e.g., David Boies’ involvement in survivor suits) rather than exhaustive lists of newly named plaintiffs after 2023, and many survivors have chosen or been steered into the estate’s voluntary victims’ compensation program—decisions that affect who sues and when—so available sources do not provide a definitive catalog of every post-2023 plaintiff ^{[3] [7]}. Court filings referenced in major outlets confirm that at least one ongoing Manhattan federal action and related claims against the co-executors remain among the last live disputes over residual estate funds, but specifics about new individual plaintiffs in that window are limited in the cited reporting ^{[6] [2]}.

5. Competing narratives and possible agendas to watch

Two competing narratives run through the reporting: plaintiffs’ lawyers and the U.S. Virgin Islands frame litigation as claims to hold facilitators and institutions accountable and to preserve limited funds for survivors, while estate beneficiaries and co-executors argue for lawful administration of post-mortem trusts and dispute liability—an agenda that can be read as protecting potential inheritances and insulating executors from personal exposure ^{[3] [6]}. Journalistic and institutional sources sometimes emphasize different stakes—tax refunds, property sales, or criminal-like enterprise claims—so evaluating any single article requires attention to which litigation strand it focuses on ^{[5] [7]}.