settlement

March 28 (UPI) — Bank of America reached a settlement with a survivor of deceased sex predator Jeffrey Epstein that will distribute $72.5 million to his victims.

The survivor, named in the case as “BOA Jane Doe,” and her attorneys told a federal judge on Friday that a settlement had been reached with the bank on a proposed class-action suit over Epstein’s decades of abuse and trafficking of women and teenage girls, The Charlotte Observer reported.

The suit alleged that the bank ignored signals of Epstein’s crimes by continuing to do business with him while he was committing his crimes.

Doe’s attorneys said they are aware of at least 60 women who were abused or trafficked by Epstein, however the settlement covers all women who experienced either at Epstein’s hands or those “connected to or otherwise associated” with him between June 30, 2008, and July 6, 2019, NBC News reported.

Bank of America, which is the largest bank in the United States, denied liability or wrongdoing in providing Epstein banking services but settled in order to avoid a trial.

“While we stand by our prior statements made in the filings in this case, including that Bank of America did not facilitate sex trafficking crimes, this resolution allows us to put this matter behind us and provides further closure for the plaintiffs,” the bank told The Observer and NBC in a statement.

With the settlement filed, a judge will still have to approve it at a hearing, which is scheduled for April 2.

Bank of America now joins JPMorgan, which settled for $290 million, and Deutsche Bank, which settled for $75 million, in paying what is thought to be more than 1,000 women that Epstein abused in his years-long scheme.

Los Angeles County’s chief executive officer Fesia Davenport, who has been on medical leave since October, has announced that she will resign next month.

In a LinkedIn post, Davenport said she was leaving county service to “focus on my health and wellness.”

A notice to the Board of Supervisors provided to The Times Saturday said she had decided to step down April 16 “based primarily on hereditary and ongoing health issues initially uncovered late last year, the risks of which have become clearer based on more recent medical testing and consultation with my doctors.”

She said the “extraordinary amount of time and energy” required of the chief executive played into her decision.

“Although I originally assumed that I would be able to return to my post, I now know that I would be unable to do the job as it deserves to be done while also prioritizing my health,” she told the supervisors.

Supervisor Kathryn Barger issued a statement Saturday saying, “I’m disappointed by Fesia Davenport’s decision to step down. Her dedication and accomplishments over nearly three decades have left a lasting impact on Los Angeles County.”

Davenport, who was appointed to the county’s top job in 2021, received an undisclosed $2-million settlement last summer to compensate for damage to her “professional reputation” from Measure G, a voter-approved ballot measure that will soon eliminate her position.

In a July 8 letter, released by the county counsel in October through a public record request, Davenport said she sought $2 million in damages for “reputational harm, embarrassment, and physical, emotional and mental distress caused by the Measure G.”

Under Measure G, which voters approved in 2024, the county chief executive, who manages the county government and oversees its budget, will be elected by voters instead of appointed by the board. The elected county executive will be in place by 2028.

Measure G “has had, and will continue to have, an unprecedented impact on my professional reputation, health, career, income, and retirement,” Davenport wrote to county counsel Dawyn Harrison. She said it had “irrevocably changed my life, my professional career, economic outlook, and plans for the future.”

At the time the payout was disclosed, Davenport had begun a medical leave, saying at the time she expected to be back to work early this year.

A lengthy email to her staff, posted on LAist, which first disclosed her resignation, said the unspecified “health crisis” has affected three of her siblings and posed risks to her that “have become clearer based on more recent medical testing and consultation with my doctors.”

Her brother Raymond died in 2018 after “experiencing a sudden health crisis,” she said. Last year, two more of her sisters survived the same health crisis, but one will now require 24-hour care for the rest of her life, she said.

“Although I am not out of the woods yet, I am thankful to the Board for granting me the space to focus on my health and to arm myself with the knowledge I needed to make informed decisions,” she wrote.

The office of chief executive issued a statement Saturday saying chief operating officer Joe Nicchitta will continue serving as acting chief executive officer while Davenport remains on medical leave.

“We appreciate Fesia’s nearly three decades of service to Los Angeles County and all that she has accomplished on behalf of its residents and communities,” the statement said.

Davenport listed a number of accomplishments in her letter to the board, including setting up five new departments maintaining the county’s credit rating when other jurisdictions were being downgraded and “balancing the budget while developing a financing plan to compensate sexual assault victims — the largest settlement of its kind in American history.”

That payout has now come under scrutiny after a Times investigation found that some plaintiffs had been paid to join the class-action lawsuit.

USC has settled a lawsuit with a former high-ranking athletic department official who alleged the university allowed former athletic director Mike Bohn to racially harass and discriminate against her, then fired her when she voiced concerns about Bohn’s behavior.

Joyce Bell Limbrick was the highest-ranking Black and female official in USC’s athletic department when she was fired by the university in September 2023, four months after Bohn resigned amid an internal investigation into his conduct and the culture of the department. Bell Limbrick filed suit early last year, accusing USC of wrongful termination.

That dispute was settled out of court this week. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

When reached by The Times, Bell Limbrick declined to comment. Bohn has never publicly addressed the allegations.

While the lawsuit never made it to trial, it nonetheless offered the most detailed account yet of the conduct that led to Bohn’s resignation.

Bell Limbrick filed a Title IX complaint with the university against Bohn in October 2022, after an incident in which she says Bohn punched her on the arm at a USC volleyball match. That complaint ultimately compelled an investigation, during which, according to her complaint, Bell Limbrick told USC officials of “Bohn’s history and rumors of inappropriate and unwanted touching involving … other females at both Cincinnati and USC.”

The university hired an outside law firm that specializes in institutional responses to racial and sexual harassment and discrimination to investigate Bohn five months later. The Times learned of that investigation shortly thereafter, as well as a previous investigation into Bohn’s conduct at Cincinnati, and in May, asked both Bohn and USC about those concerns.

Bohn resigned a day later.

Soon after that, the university fired Bell Limbrick, citing “a pattern of poor performance.” She was the only member of an 11-member executive team to lose her job and, according to the complaint, had just been awarded a “merit increase” on account of her “overall job performance.”

Bell Limbrick worked at USC for nine years, initially as the director of athletic compliance, before Bohn was hired in 2019. Shortly after he became athletic director, Bohn promoted Bell Limbrick to senior woman administrator, one of the highest-ranking positions in the department. According to her complaint, she had been one of the few Black women to hold such a position at a major American university.

“Ms. Bell Limbrick had a thriving career at USC and she loved her work. Then, Mike Bohn arrived,” her attorney, J. Bernard Alexander, said in a statement in 2025.

”[Bohn’s] incessant, racially charged remarks made Joyce feel uncomfortable and undervalued, but more than that — he actively isolated her from the executive team and undermined her work. She already was vulnerable as the only Black woman on the team, and rather than support her, the university allowed Bohn to make her life hell.”

Her complaint detailed inappropriate comments made in front of USC donors and staff, as well as insensitive or discriminatory remarks made in her presence. At the time, The Times spoke with six people with knowledge of the department’s inner workings who largely corroborated her claims about Bohn’s conduct.

Bohn declined to respond to The Times’ questions about his conduct leading the athletic department, but he provided a statement to The Times on the day of his resignation in May 2023 stating he would “always be proud of leading the program out of the most tumultuous times in the history of the profession.”

“In moving on, it is important now that I focus on being present with my treasured family, addressing ongoing health challenges, and reflecting on how I can be impactful in the future,” Bohn said in the statement.

KEVIN Spacey has settled with three men who accused him of sexual assault over a 13-year period.

The Oscar-winning actor was due to go on trial at the High Court later this year after the complainants brought a civil case against him.

But Spacey has now reached an out-of-court settlement with the men, which has now frozen the legal proceedings.

It comes after the Usual Suspects star was cleared of nine sexual offence charges at a criminal trial in 2023.

Spacey has always denied any wrongdoing – claiming the accusations against him were motivated by “money, money and then money”.

Two of the men who accused the Hollywood actor during the star-studded trial then filed civil cases at the High Court.

One man, known only as LNP, claimed that Spacey “deliberately assaulted” him on around 12 occasions between 2000 and 2005.

The second – referred to as GHI – alleged he “suffered psychiatric damage and financial loss” as a result of an assault in 2008.

He claimed he met Spacey through a workshop at London’s Old Vic theatre, where the star was artistic director of the Old Vic between 2004 and 2013.

The third man, Ruari Cannon, who has waived his right to anonymity, claimed Spacey groped him in 2013 during a party at the theatre.

Spacey said the allegation was “ridiculous and it never happened”.

The court was told previously Cannon had reached a settlement with the Old Vic.

Spacey – who won Oscars for The Usual Suspects and American Beauty – was one of the most high-profile scalps during the Me Too movement.

The allegations caused his Oscar-winning career to crumble around him as he faced claims from multiple men in the UK and US.

He was stripped of an International Emmy Award in the wake of the claims and was edited out of Sir Ridley Scott film All The Money In The World.

His central character in acclaimed Netflix series House of Cards was also killed off after he was axed from the show.

Speaking in November, Spacey claimed he lost his house due to the financial fallout caused by the expensive lawsuits.

He said he put all his belongings in storage facilities – and has been forced to live in hotels and Airbnbs.

Live Nation, the ticketing giant that reached a tentative settlement with the Department of Justice last week, remains under fire.

A coalition of more than 30 states that had joined the original lawsuit filed in 2024 is refusing to accept the $200-million settlement, causing the trial to resume this week in Manhattan’s Federal Court.

The settlement with the Justice Department requires Beverly Hills-based Live Nation to open Ticketmaster to rival ticket sellers, force the company to open select venues to competing promoters and cap service fees at 15%. California is one of the key states still involved in the trial.

But those steps fall short, critics say.

“It’s clear that Live Nation has manipulated the market and made itself untouchable by competitors, hurting artists, hurting fans, hurting venues, all the while, raking in the cash,” said California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta at the Capitol Forum conference last week. “Not because it’s a better service or product, because it acted illegally and created a monopoly.”

U.S. senators have also chimed in. Minnesota’s Amy Klobuchar recently introduced the Antitrust Accountability and Transparency Act to strengthen the review of antitrust settlements. Klobuchar said in a release that it’s “clear the American people got the raw end of the deal.”

And Connecticut’s Richard Blumenthal released a report that provides new details into the inner workings of Ticketmaster and urges attorneys general across the nation to reject the settlement.

Blumenthal said that the Trump administration’s settlement with Live Nation will keep consumers vulnerable to Ticketmaster’s “anticompetitive practices” and ultimately push “concert tickets farther out of reach for fans.”

The senator’s report, entitled “So Casually Cruel: How Ticketmaster’s Monopoly Supercharges Prices and Fees,” examined over 100,000 documents and Ticketmaster’s revenue data. The report argues that the company leveraged its market control to make tickets available on the resale market before they were available to the general public in an effort to hike prices and boost profits.

“The ticketing market is broken,” Blumenthal said in a statement.

In its own statement, Ticketmaster said Blumenthal’s report “misrepresents how the live events industry works” and that the problem lies in the secondary ticketing industry.

“This is why we’ve long called for industry resale reform, including price caps, while also developing tools to empower artists and protect fans,” Ticketmaster said in a statement.

Recently, Ticketmaster has backed ticketing bills like AB-1349 and advocated to Congress for an industry-wide resale cap.

Sens. Blumenthal and Klobuchar are among many industry experts who say the settlement doesn’t adequately address anticompetitive practices and falls short of protecting consumers from high ticket prices.

Under Klobuchar’s new bill, courts could have 90 days to review public comments and government responses.

“When the government prosecutes antitrust violations, the goal should be to uphold the law, lower prices, and protect consumers and small businesses,” Klobuchar said in the statement.

Lindsay Owens, the executive director of the economic policy nonprofit Groundwork Collaborative, said the settlement will end up being “incredibly costly for concertgoers, performers, and independent venues.”

“California and 35 other states are standing up for Americans who are sick and tired of being ripped off and having to scrimp and save to enjoy a night out,” Owens said in a statement.

This ongoing trial is one of several major legal battles the ticketing giant is facing. The company is also being sued by the Federal Trade Commission and is dealing with a handful of class-action lawsuits from groups of concertgoers.

Times staff writer Meg James contributed to this report.

Live Nation has reached a settlement with the Justice Department in an antitrust case that put the entertainment giant at risk of being separated from Ticketmaster.

The ticket vendor’s settlement offer was announced, in a court hearing on Monday, less than a week after the long-awaited trial began. With pending approval from the judge, Live Nation will have to pay damages to the suing states and allow competitors to sell tickets on its platform. Media reports have said the company agreed to pay more than $200 million as part of the settlement.

The settlement caught Judge Arun Subramanian off guard. He said no one informed him of the tentative deal until late Sunday, even though a term sheet for a possible settlement was signed on Thursday, according to the Associated Press.

A 12-person jury was seated last Tuesday in a Manhattan federal courthouse and the trial had reached witness testimony by the end of last week. The complaint was filed in 2024, when the federal government, 39 states including California and the District of Columbia, alleged that Live Nation and Ticketmaster have monopolies in various aspects of the live music industry, such as concert promotion, venue operations, artist management and ticketing services.

Live Nation could not immediately be reached for a comment.

Many of the large monopoly claims were thrown out during a pretrial hearing last month, including an allegation that Live Nation’s industry power raises ticket prices and harms consumers. But the new settlement offers major structural changes to the company’s ticketing services.

If the trial judge approves the settlement, the Beverly Hills-based company will have to open parts of its platform to rival ticketing operators. This means third-party sellers like SeatGeek could list tickets and have access to Ticketmaster’s technology.

Another key claim in the lawsuit concerned Ticketmaster’s alleged exclusivity contracts, which required artists who booked Live Nation-owned venues to also use its ticketing services. The settlement now limits these contracts to four years and allows venues to place a number of its tickets on competing platforms.

The original lawsuit also argued that Live Nation manages more than 400 artists and controls more than 265 venues in North America — all while Ticketmaster simultaneously controls around 80% of the primary ticket marketplace and is increasing its involvement in the resale market. Under the pending legal agreement, Live Nation would have to divest more than 10 of its venues and Ticketmaster would also have to cap service fees at 15%.

Serona Elton, attorney and interim vice dean at the University of Miami’s Frost School of Music, said this outcome can be understood in two ways — it’s either a win that addresses anti-competitive behaviors or a deal that does not go far enough.

“It is important to understand that it is not illegal to be a monopoly and control a large portion of the market,” said Elton in a statement. “What is illegal is the use of anti-competitive tactics. In analyzing the settlement, the question to ask is if it does enough to address the alleged tactics and the harm they may have caused.”

Elton added that venues could benefit from these adjustments, but “music fans should not think this is going to bring ticket prices down to an affordable level as there are other causes behind the sky-high ticket prices.”

Stephen Parker, the executive director of the National Independent Venue Association, similarly expressed some skepticism about the potential settlement.

“The reported settlement does not appear to include any specific and explicit protections for fans, artists, or independent venues and festivals,” he said in a statement.

“Reported details also indicate that ticket resale platforms could be further empowered through new requirements for Ticketmaster to host their listings, which would likely exacerbate the price gouging potential for predatory resellers and the platforms that serve them,” Parker added . “If these facts are true, NIVA views this as a failure of the justice system.”

A settlement could mark the potential end to one of the major legal battles Live Nation is facing. The company is also being sued by the Federal Trade Commission and is dealing with a handful of class-action lawsuits from groups of concertgoers.

After the news of the settlement broke, Live Nation’s stock jumped over 5% to $164.03.