Cryptocurrency Class Action Won't Be Arbitrated, Appeals Court Rules
A federal appeals court ruled U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra was right to rule out arbitration in a class action alleging a cryptocurrency fraud.
April 23, 2018 at 03:21 PM
3 minute read
A class action filed by consumers who were ripped off by the owner of a cryptocurrency company will not be settled in arbitration, a federal appeals court has ruled.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on Monday upheld a West Palm Beach federal judge's ruling that the case is not subject to arbitration.
The class members are customers of Cryptsy, a company that converted customers' bitcoin into real cash. According to Eleventh Circuit's per curiam opinion, founder Paul Vernon over the course of three years converted $8 million of bitcoin into cash, which was deposited into his bank account through a company called Coinbase, the defendant in the class action.
Vernon fled the country after the money was in his hands.
Lead plaintiff Brandon Leidel brought claims against Coinbase for aiding and abetting Cryptsy's breaches of its fiduciary duties, aiding and abetting Vernon's theft of his customer's money, negligence and unjust enrichment from collecting fees for converting bitcoin that belonged to Cryptsy's customers but instead ended up in Vernon's personal account.
Coinbase argued Cryptsy's receiver is bound by the arbitration clause in the user agreements that Cryptsy, through Vernon, entered into in 2013 and 2014 “because the receiver merely stepped into the shoes of Cryptsy with respect to those agreements,” the opinion said.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra ruled the arbitration clause in the user agreements didn't apply because Leidel did not assert a right to benefits under those agreements as evidenced by the fact that Leidel had not brought a claim for breach of contract, just tort claims.
Marra subsequently denied Coinbase's motion to compel arbitration, and the defendant appealed, arguing it was entitled to arbitration under the doctrine of equitable estoppel.
However, the court reasoned, “Leidel does not seek to enforce the User Agreements entered into by Vernon and Cryptsy. Because Defendant has failed to establish both that Leidel is relying on a contract to assert his claims and that the scope of the arbitration clause in that contract covers the dispute, Leidel is not equitably estopped from avoiding the arbitration clause in defendant's user agreements.”
The case was decided by Circuit Judges William Pryor, Julie Carnes and R. Lanier Anderson.
The class is represented by Silver Miller in Coral Springs and the Wites Law Firm in Lighthouse Point.
“I have preached that accountability, transparency and verification are needed in the crypto exchange space,” Silver Miller co-founder David Silver said in a statement Monday. “This ruling brings the plaintiffs one step closer to finding out just what type of know your customer protocols and anti-money laundering protections Coinbase employed and whether Coinbase complied with state and federal statutes in that regard. Coinbase has delayed and tried to keep discovery hidden from the public long enough. That stops now.”
Marc Wites of the Wites Law Firm said the appeal was correctly decided, and he was eager to proceed.
The plaintiffs' “only contractual relationship was with Cryptsy. They did not sue Coinbase for breach of contract and thus were not bound by the arbitration agreement,” Wites said.
Andrew Kemp-Gerstel of Liebler Gonzalez & Portuondo in Miami represents the defendant and did not respond to a request for comment by deadline.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLatest Boutique Combination in Florida Continues Am Law 200 Merger Activity
3 minute readMiami-Dade Litigation Over $1.7 Million Brazilian Sugar Deal Faces Turning Point
3 minute readMeta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250