Los Angeles, CA — April 2016. A short-lived civil lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California briefly drew national attention when a woman named Katie Johnson accused Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey E. Epstein of misconduct. The case, docketed as Johnson v. Trump et al., No. 5:16‑cv‑00797, was filed on April 26, 2016, before Judge Dolly M. Gee, with discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson.
📌 The Complaint
-
Johnson filed the complaint pro se (without an attorney).
-
The filing alleged violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, categorized as “Civil Rights: Other.”
-
The complaint was six pages long, naming Trump and Epstein as defendants.
-
Johnson listed a Twentynine Palms, California address and did not request a jury trial.
-
The complaint was entered into the docket as Document 1, the only substantive filing in the case.
📌 Procedural Timeline
-
April 26, 2016: Complaint filed in the Central District of California.
-
April 27–May 1, 2016: Case assigned to Judge Dolly M. Gee; discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson.
-
May 2, 2016: Case terminated within a week of filing.
-
May 9, 2016: Final docket entry noted; no substantive hearings or motions occurred.
The speed of dismissal is notable: the case never advanced beyond the initial filing stage.
📌 Depositions and Discovery
-
Court records show no depositions were taken.
-
The case ended before discovery could begin, meaning neither Johnson nor the defendants were deposed.
-
The docket reflects only the initial complaint and administrative closure.
📌 Public Access
-
The original complaint is publicly available through FactCheck.org’s document archive and docket aggregators such as CourtListener and the Internet Archive.
-
These sources confirm the case’s rapid dismissal and lack of substantive proceedings.
-
Because the filing was pro se, it did not include supporting exhibits, affidavits, or corroborating documentation.
📌 Context
The lawsuit was one of several pro se filings around the 2016 election season that attracted media coverage but did not advance in court.
-
Legal analysts noted that pro se filings often fail to meet procedural standards, leading to rapid dismissal.
-
The Johnson case was dismissed so quickly that no evidence was tested, no depositions were taken, and no judicial findings were made.
-
The allegations therefore remain unverified, existing only in the text of the complaint itself.
📰 Bottom Line
The case Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump (5:16‑cv‑00797) consisted of a single pro se complaint filed in April 2016. It was dismissed within days, with no depositions or discovery conducted. The complaint remains publicly accessible, but the court took no further action on the allegations.
Add comment
Comments