Bank of America settlement talks could halt Leon Black deposition

A proposed settlement between Bank of America and a group of Jeffrey Epstein’s accusers could halt plans to question billionaire financier Leon Black under oath, even after a federal judge declined to pause the case amid speculation about a possible criminal investigation tied to the same underlying conduct.

Lawyers for the bank and the accusers told the court during a March 12 pretrial conference that they had reached a “settlement in principle,” prompting the court to pause deadlines and set a schedule to finalize the deal.

Under that schedule, the parties must file detailed settlement papers by March 27, with a hearing set for April 2 in federal court in Manhattan to determine whether the agreement will be approved.

The agreement would likely cancel a March 26 deposition of Black, the former chief executive of Apollo Global Management and a major art collector and current trustee of the Museum of Modern Art.

In a March 20 memorandum opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff set out his reasoning for a March 11 order denying Bank of America’s request to pause the case.

Bank of America had argued that the lawsuit should be paused under a provision of the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act that requires courts to stay civil cases while related criminal actions are pending.

The bank pointed to public reporting, government disclosures tied to the so-called “Epstein Files,” and other materials as suggesting a possible ongoing criminal investigation.

Rakoff rejected that argument, finding there was insufficient evidence that any qualifying criminal action was underway. The statute’s stay provision applies to criminal proceedings—not mere investigations—and speculation about a potential probe is not enough to halt a civil case, he said.

He also noted that the U.S. Justice Department declined to indicate whether any investigation is pending, and that such silence cannot be used to infer that one exists. And he said the government likely could not be compelled to disclose the existence of any related investigation.

The ruling means the case would have continued toward discovery absent the proposed settlement, including the planned deposition of Black.

The lawsuit alleges that more than $150 million in payments from Black to Epstein helped sustain Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation and should have raised alarms at the bank. Black has said the payments were for legitimate financial and estate-planning services and has denied wrongdoing.

Bank of America has also denied wrongdoing, arguing in court filings that it provided routine banking services and did not knowingly assist Epstein.

The case is one of several brought by Epstein accusers against major financial institutions. JPMorgan agreed to pay $290 million and Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $75 million to resolve similar claims.

The proposed settlement remains subject to court approval, meaning the deposition could theoretically proceed if the agreement falls through.

Separately, Black has been asked to testify before the House Oversight Committee in May as part of a broader congressional investigation into Epstein and his network.

Meanwhile, former MoMA director Glenn Lowry has defended Black over Epstein-related scrutiny he has faced in recent comments to the Wall Street Journal.

“As far as I know, Leon has never been charged with a crime related to Epstein,” Lowry said.

“He’s certainly been subject to various suits, but he’s also been a very supportive trustee. He chose not to run for re-election for chair because he wanted to make a decision that was not going to be harmful to the museum. Our board looked very carefully at Leon and ultimately decided that he was a solid trustee and should remain.”

Stories like this take time, documents and a commitment to public transparency. Please support independent arts journalism by subscribing to Urgent Matter and supporting our work directly.