{"id":1349,"date":"2018-07-24T10:44:41","date_gmt":"2018-07-24T14:44:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.silvermillerlaw.com\/?p=1349"},"modified":"2023-06-09T12:12:20","modified_gmt":"2023-06-09T12:12:20","slug":"scream-facts-miami-dade-attorneys-trade-barbs-11-4-billion-bitcoin-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"news_posts","link":"https:\/\/www.silvermillerlaw.com\/press\/in-the-news\/scream-facts-miami-dade-attorneys-trade-barbs-11-4-billion-bitcoin-lawsuit\/","title":{"rendered":"Scream These Facts’: Miami-Dade Attorneys Trade Barbs in $11.4 Billion Bitcoin Lawsuit"},"content":{"rendered":"
Neither side is holding back in a\u00a0multibillion-dollar lawsuit playing out in federal court in Miami-Dade. Their pleadings are relentless \u2014 52 in the last five months\u00a0\u2014 and riddled with\u00a0barbs in what has become one of the most visible fights over\u00a0bitcoin\u00a0in the United States.<\/p>\n
Now, it is up to\u00a0U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom to decide whether the complaint will survive a motion to dismiss.\u00a0To help persuade her,\u00a0each side sicced a team of litigators\u00a0\u2014 and\u00a0their best prose\u00a0\u2014 on the problem.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe do our best to put Plaintiff\u2019s secondhand allegations into an orderly narrative, taking as true \u2014 only for purposes of this motion \u2014 the amended complaint\u2019s meatless gruel lightly seasoned with hearsay, stolen emails, information published on unreliable internet web sites, and improperly leaked transcripts of secret Australian government investigative interviews,\u201d defense attorneys from Rivero Mestre in Miami wrote in a motion asking the judge to throw out the lawsuit.<\/p>\n
Plaintiffs counsel from Boies Schiller Flexner shot right back: Their pleadings call the defense\u2019s argument an \u201coverdone characterization\u201d that ignored that the complaint\u2019s allegations\u00a0came largely from the defendant\u2019s\u00a0own admissions. They argue, for instance, that their client\u2019s relative played a\u00a0pivotal role in creating bitcoin in 2009\u00a0\u2014 a claim the\u00a0defendant has publicly made for years.<\/p>\n
So the Boies Schiller lawyers,\u00a0Devin \u201cVelvel\u201d Freedman and Kyle Roche, penned a pleading to discredit the defense\u2019s argument that the case does not belong in a Florida courtroom. \u201cThese arguments are classic red herrings,\u201d they wrote in a memorandum in opposition to the defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss the amended complaint.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The memorandum goes on to suggest\u00a0Wright has repeatedly committed fraud, having taken \u201cunconscionable advantage of plaintiffs through material omissions and false promises,\u201d as well as allegedly proffering \u201cfalse\u00a0testimony to this court.\u201d<\/p>\n
The claims wagered by\u00a0the plaintiff have been met by the defense\u2019s own literary flourishes and\u00a0accusations that Ira Kleiman only filed suit because he didn\u2019t have the codes to access his brother\u2019s bitcoins.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe complaint and its exhibits fairly scream these facts, but plaintiff nonetheless tries to\u00a0shakedown Dr. Wright for $11 billion or more,\u201d one defense filing reads.<\/p>\n
The litigation has sparked national interest.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs this story unfolds, it will be amazing to watch,\u201d said\u00a0David Silver, a Coral Springs-based attorney who specializes in cryptocurrency litigation, but is not involved in the bitcoin suit. \u201cI\u2019m happy to grab my popcorn and see what happens.\u201d<\/strong> The suit centers on allegations that\u00a047-year-old Australian entrepreneur Craig Wright asserted control of more than $11.4 billion in\u00a0bitcoin, the best-known and most valuable digital or cryptocurrency \u2014 a fortune that should have allegedly gone to a South Florida computer security expert.<\/p>\n On the opposing side is\u00a0the estate of Dave Kleiman, a technology security expert who\u00a0died in 2013 of complications from a staph, or\u00a0MRSA, infection.<\/p>\n In 2015, Wright identified himself and Kleiman as Satoshi Nakamoto, the oft-discussed but never-heard-from creator of bitcoin,\u00a0which has dominated conversations about cryptocurrency. Some observers are skeptical, but attorneys following the litigation say the case has the potential to unmask\u00a0Nakamoto, or disprove rumors the mysterious inventor was really a pseudonym for a two-man team.<\/p>\n \u201cForgetting the cryptocurrency aspect of this case, the allegations are simply fascinating as alleged,\u201d Silver, founding partner\u00a0at Silver Miller,\u00a0told the Daily Business Review.<\/strong><\/p>\n If the claim is true and the two men were Nakamoto,\u00a0Kleiman\u00a0should have been worth billions. But his relatives\u00a0claim Wright\u00a0took control of all the assets.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat cannot be dismissed, however, is the fact that Mr. Wright and Mr. Kleiman were early adopters of bitcoin and business partners,\u201d Silver said.<\/strong><\/p>\n Kleiman\u2019s brother, Ira, filed suit as his personal representative against Wright in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. He alleged Wright absconded with billions of dollars in bitcoin and intellectual property that would have belonged to Kleiman. In a court filing dated May 14, Kleiman\u2019s estate alleged Wright wrongfully\u00a0took control of the assets and committed fraud in order to retain oversight. The suit claims that when he died, Kleiman was entitled to up to 1.1 million bitcoins, worth more than $11 billion.<\/p>\n Given the amount of money at stake, the suit has become tense. Allegations of perjury and disagreements over jurisdiction\u00a0were flying freely.<\/p>\n Wright\u00a0\u2014 through his attorneys Andr\u00e9s Rivero, Jorge Mestre, Alan Rolnick and Daniel Sox of\u00a0 Rivero Mestre \u2014 has moved to dismiss the lawsuit. His\u00a0motion describes the suit as \u201cinherently and fatally infirm,\u201d claiming that the plaintiff lacks standing, has not adequately asserted jurisdiction over Wright, and that Kleiman\u2019s estate and attorneys have not provided conclusive evidence of a partnership between Wright and Kleiman.<\/p>\n But the complaint levied against Wright holds that he and Kleiman jointly mined bitcoin together from 2009 until Kleiman\u2019s passing about four years later. To help bolster its argument that the U.S. District Court is the correct jurisdiction, it adds that the men mined the coins in part through an American business\u00a0\u2014\u00a0W&K Info Defense Research, a\u00a0limited liability company that\u00a0Kleiman formed in Florida.<\/p>\n \u201cRegardless of its exact ownership structure, the purpose of W&K was clear,\u201d the complaint reads. \u201cCraig and Dave created it to mine bitcoin and develop intellectual property.\u201d<\/p>\n Plaintiffs counsel, Roche, said the case is\u00a0 where it belongs \u00a0\u2014 before a U.S. federal judge.<\/p>\n \u201cDr. Wright\u2019s motion to dismiss goes out of its way to use hyperbolic language deriding the allegations in the complaint and to claim the case belongs in Australia,\u201d Roche told the Daily Business Review. \u201cBut he fails to appreciate that the amended complaint is largely supported by his own admissions and that his supposed Australian witnesses know nothing about the relevant issues in the case, which are all centered in Florida. \u2026 At bottom, the claims are asserted by Florida citizens, in Florida, over assets created in Florida, for injuries occurring in Florida, and for breaches of fiduciary duties owed to Florida citizens. The case clearly belongs here.\u201d<\/p>\n The suit alleges that following Kleiman\u2019s death, Wright \u201cinstituted an elaborate scheme to assert dominion over Dave\u2019s and W&K\u2019s bitcoin and intellectual property\u201d in order to claim research and development tax credits in his native Australia.<\/p>\n The Australian Tax Office had been conducting a yearslong investigation of Wright for potential fraud and tax evasion when he allegedly\u00a0claimed control of Kleiman\u2019s W&K assets and the company\u2019s intellectual property\u00a0in filings with the Australian government. During this period, the Florida plaintiff claimed, Wright forged Kleiman\u2019s signature on documents that ostensibly transferred his W&K assets to Wright. The complaint also alleges that Wright reached out to Ira Kleiman in order to mislead him about his late brother\u2019s stake in W&K, as well as use him as a pawn in his fight with the Australian Tax Office. Shortly thereafter, Australian tax authorities raided Wright\u2019s home on Dec. 9, 2015. He has resided in London ever since.<\/p>\n Plaintiff\u00a0pleadings suggest\u00a0Wright perjured himself during those proceedings. They\u00a0allege\u00a0Wright contradicted himself in two sworn statements to different courts. In Australia,\u00a0he claimed in documents to hold a 50 percent stake in the company, and also identified himself as W&K\u2019s \u201clead researcher.\u201d But to derail Kleiman\u2019s claim in Florida,\u00a0he\u00a0later said he was never a shareholder in the company.<\/p>\n \u201cCraig\u2019s boldfaced misrepresentations and perjury before this court constitute a continuation of his grand fraud to unlawfully take plaintiffs\u2019 assets,\u201d the complaint reads. \u201cSaid differently, Craig\u2019s latest fraud on this Florida court is simply one more action he\u2019s taken\u00a0\u2026 to defraud Dave\u2019s estate and W&K.\u201d<\/p>\n However, despite immense dollar-value assigned to the litigation, this case is likely to remain insular in its impact, despite cryptocurrency\u00a0emerging as\u00a0a hot-button\u00a0issue and largely unexplored\u00a0area of law.<\/p>\n \u201cAll of the lawsuits I\u2019m involved in \u2026 are about investors in cryptocurrency technology who have been misled about the technology they invested in,\u201d Silver added. \u201cThis is just two people fighting.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Read the Full Article:<\/p>\n
\n
\n<\/p>\nWho is Satoshi Nakamoto?<\/h3>\n