Bank of America reaches proposed settlement in Epstein victim lawsuit
Charlotte-based Bank of America has reached a settlement in principle with a victim of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a proposed class-action lawsuit.
The parties in the case informed a New York judge of the preliminary agreement on Thursday, according to a Monday federal court filing. A hearing to discuss the settlement is scheduled for April 2.
“The women entrapped and abused by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell (associate of Epstein), started a monumental reckoning with their brave and fearless voices,” stated Sigrid McCawley, managing partner at the New York-based Boies Schiller Flexner law firm and lead on the legal team that sued the bank. The resolution of the case against Bank of America is one more step on the road to much-deserved justice.”
Additional details regarding settlement terms were not immediately released.
Bank of America declined to provide a statement following the settlement announcement.
In a November 2025 motion to dismiss the lawsuit, the bank argued the lawsuit sought to hold the bank civilly liable for Epstein’s crimes based on “nothing more than allegations that it provided routine services to customers who at the time had no known connection to Epstein’s sex trafficking.”
The bank claimed the complaint was “threadbare and meritless,” contrasting it with previous suits against other banks that alleged the provision of non-routine services.
About the Epstein-related case against Bank of America
However, in mid-February, a judge ruled the lawsuit could proceed after the plaintiff, identified as “BOA Jane Doe,” presented sufficient evidence.
He alleged the bank ignored clear warning signs of Epstein’s abuse while profiting from his business, ultimately breaking federal and state laws, including the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.
In his February opinion, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff allowed two core claims under the TVPA to proceed while dismissing four others.
Rakoff wrote that the complaint “plausibly alleges that Bank of America recklessly disregarded” information indicating Epstein’s operation was involved in sex trafficking. He cited widespread media coverage and previous civil suits describing Epstein as a “serial sexual abuser.”
The lawsuit highlighted several red flags, including:
- Suspicious locations — banking activity tied to a New York address where dozens of trafficking victims were reportedly housed.
- Internal knowledge — evidence that a former banker at a Bank of America subsidiary was aware of Epstein’s crimes and the risks associated with his accounts.
- Regulatory failures — claims that the bank obstructed law enforcement by failing to file required Suspicious Activity Reports.
Rakoff noted that the bank provided “non-routine services” to Epstein’s associates, such as granting Jane Doe preferred customer status despite her having no clear source of income. He concluded the bank may have “turned a blind eye” by failing to conduct due diligence.
While the core trafficking claims moved forward, the court rejected allegations that the bank directly perpetrated trafficking, noting the TVPA does not allow for “aiding and abetting” liability.
More on Epstein and big banks
This Bank of America case follows a similar suit against Bank of New York Mellon, which was dismissed in January after the court found Mellon’s role was limited to routine correspondent banking.
According to the plaintiff’s attorneys in the Bank of America lawsuit, more than 4,700 Epstein-related transfers worth over $1 billion passed through major financial institutions between the early 2000s and 2019.
Jane Doe alleges that in 2013, Epstein’s associates instructed her to open a Bank of America account to mislead immigration authorities. She claimed she was placed on the payroll of a shell company, with payments routed from an account belonging to Epstein.
The suit further alleges that MC2 Model Management—a firm co-founded by Epstein — acted as a cover for trafficking, using Bank of America accounts to recruit young women under the guise of modeling opportunities.
This story was originally published March 17, 2026 at 1:57 PM.
