A new development in the “sex slave” lawsuit filed by Chirayu Rana against JPMorgan and its CEO Lorna Hajdini.
A sensational lawsuit involving a female executive and her colleague who claimed a female made him a sex slave took its most surprising turn this week. The New York Post reported that former JP Morgan banker Shirayu Rana wants to withdraw the case from Manhattan Supreme Court and resubmit it to federal court.
Lawyers representing Shirayu Rana and Lorna Haidini (also JP Morgan) exchanged scathing remarks about the case.Shirayu Rana’s former lawyer had left the case and Rana was currently representing himself. But now he has a new lawyer and they want to withdraw the case from this court and file it elsewhere. The bank’s attorney said they couldn’t do “forum shopping” and choose the right court. Rana’s new counsel “entered this case with an approach similar to that of his previous counsel — promising the press new evidence to support Plaintiff’s claims while simultaneously seeking to delay this lawsuit and any accountability for Plaintiff’s lies,” Hajdini’s lawyers wrote.JPMorgan’s lawyer, Cardell P. Spangler of Winston Taylor, wrote that Rana “is not entitled to reconsider his claims because he has appointed new counsel.” The filing added: “If he no longer wishes to bring a lawsuit in this forum, he is free to withdraw, but he should not be allowed to resubmit these lawsuits in another court.”JP Morgan also asked the court to compel Shirayu Rana’s former lawyer to make any necessary disclosures regarding false evidence or statements.
They said Rana should either be forced to remain in state court or barred from filing the case elsewhere.Chirayu Rana said he was made a sex slave by his boss Hajdini, but the company supported Hajdini and also maintained that Lorna Hajdini was never Chirayu Rana’s boss.In the wake of Shirayu Rana’s attempt to withdraw the case, Haidini said the allegation should be discussed before Rana is allowed to file the case in any new court.
Her lawyers claim that they asked Rana’s team to submit a draft of their federal complaint twice, but they refused to do so.Rana’s lawyers responded on Monday, alleging that the opposing counsel was presenting demands to the court as if he were “a genie’s lamp providing the desires of her heart regardless of whether they are connected to truth, law or reality.”Attorney John Norensberg claimed Heidney’s file is filled with “hysteria and hyperbolic descriptions” and “continues to exploit publicly filed court documents to discredit” his client. Norensberg dismissed the forum-shopping allegations and said Rana planned to meet a Thursday deadline to file the lawsuit under his real name — but in federal court. “It is a familiar playbook used by accusers, as they attack survivors, deflect attention from the allegations, and portray themselves as the victim,” Norensberg wrote.
“
