Who are the plaintiffs and defendants named in the $310 million Palm Beach County lawsuit against Donald Trump?

1. Who the complaint identifies as defendants

The complaint explicitly names Donald J. Trump in both his individual capacity and as President, and lists Elon Musk and Bill Gates as co‑defendants, allegations carried in several outlet summaries of the Palm Beach filing ^{[5] [2] [3]}. Beyond those three widely reported public figures, some coverage says the suit also names federal entities such as the Department of Homeland Security and references “federal agencies” among the defendants, making the roster larger than the triad that has dominated headlines ^{[1] [4]}. Reports note the filing links these defendants to a purported eight‑year “trafficking and exploitation venture” and attaches civil claims ranging from human trafficking and intellectual‑property misappropriation to alleged retaliatory acts — descriptions taken from the complaint as summarized by local and online outlets ^{[1] [6]}.

2. What the reporting says about the plaintiffs

The lead plaintiff and other plaintiffs are reported as anonymous and redacted in the Palm Beach County court filing; multiple outlets emphasize the complaint keeps the plaintiffs’ names confidential in the public record ^{[3] [6] [7]}. Coverage describes the lead plaintiff as self‑represented in the filing and details dramatic allegations attributed to her — including claims of grooming, assaults, attempts on her life, and the seizure of an infant daughter — but these vivid factual assertions in news summaries come from the complaint itself, not independent reporting, and the plaintiff’s identity remains sealed in the available documents ^{[1] [5] [3]}.

3. What the suit seeks and the nature of the claims

The filing asks for at least $310 million in compensatory damages, more than $134 million in attorneys’ fees, injunctive relief that includes return of custody of the lead plaintiff’s child, and other remedies, according to multiple reports summarizing the complaint’s demand for relief ^{[2] [4] [7]}. Media descriptions portray the suit as combining human‑trafficking claims with allegations of intellectual‑property theft and coordinated retaliatory conduct; outlets note the plaintiff attempts to tether earlier default judgments from unrelated Arizona and New Jersey cases to strengthen the Florida filing, per the complaint’s strategy as summarized in reporting ^{[4] [7]}.

4. Disputed elements, limitations and alternative viewpoints

None of the cited reports indicate that any of the named defendants have been criminally charged in relation to the allegations; outlets stress these are civil claims and that Trump and other named figures have previously denied wrongdoing connected to Jeffrey Epstein, underscoring the contested nature of the allegations ^{[5] [8]}. Coverage also signals limitations: reporting relies on summaries of an “uncertified” or redacted copy of the 149‑page complaint and on hyperlocal outlets (BOCA News Now) that originally published the document, so independent verification and full public court records are not yet provided in these sources ^{[1] [7]}. Other outlets highlight that civil standards differ from criminal ones, noting plaintiffs need only prove claims by a preponderance of evidence in civil court — an important legal context that affects how the suit may proceed ^[7].

5. What is not yet confirmable from the available reporting

The precise identities of the plaintiffs, the complete list of all defendants beyond those widely named, and corroborating documentary or witness evidence supporting the most severe factual claims are not publicly detailed in the sources collected; the reporting repeatedly points to redactions and excerpts from the complaint rather than to independent investigative corroboration ^{[3] [1] [6]}. Consequently, while the defendants named in media summaries are clear, the factual veracity of the allegations and the full procedural posture remain open questions pending court filings and further public records.