The Scene at the Southern District of New York
In a packed U.S. courthouse, the Southern District of New York was abuzz with legal minds eager to dissect what could be the most contentious legal battle involving cryptocurrencies in recent memory. This afternoon, Judge Katherine Failla presided over a case that could impact tens of thousands of users affected by alleged market manipulation involving Tether (USDT) and its parent company, iFinex.
On Trial: Tether and Its Alleged Manipulative Moves
At the center of the storm is Tether, the stablecoin that has long been the subject of scrutiny. With accusations flying about significant market manipulation erupting in 2017, the courtroom heard from three plaintiff teams, each vying for the coveted lead counsel position. While iFinex stubbornly denies any wrongdoing, the stakes could not be higher for the crypto community.
Roche Cyrulnik’s Argument
Kyle Roche, representing Leibowitz et al., didn’t shy away from tooting his firm’s horn. He claimed credit as the first to investigate, the first to file, and claimed to have the best cryptocurrency expertise around. “Cryptocurrency is unique,” he pointed out, “the law is new, and this case presents difficult definitional issues.” Roche posits that Tether’s impact shouldn’t be limited to Bitcoin, suggesting a broader scope including Ether and other digital currencies affected by the alleged pump-and-dump scheme.
The Griffin Paper: A Key Piece of Evidence
Referencing the well-known Griffin paper, Roche noted how the report suggested Tether’s influence was akin to dropping a boulder into a pond — creating ripples throughout the cryptocurrency market. This academic work delved into Tether’s mysterious ways, exploring how it allegedly played a role in inflating Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency prices right after downturns. It’s a wild concept, but hey, we’re talking about crypto here.
Class Action Lawyers Go to Battle
The courtroom saw a clash of legal philosophies. Karen Lerner of Kirby Mcinerny LLP emphasized her team’s extensive experience in class action law and commodities regulation. She argued that her firm’s comprehensive analysis and proprietary algorithm were essential to pinpointing specific market manipulations and transactions. Essentially, she asserted, her team’s research was so revolutionary, it deserved the lead.
A Clash of Perspectives on Class Size
Brian Cochran from Robbins Geller also weighed in, sprinkling his contemplation on the variables of class size and what it ultimately means for victims. He suggested the definition put forth by Roche was far too broad, like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. “Not all cryptos should be included,” he argued. The notion of snatching funds from legitimate victims wasn’t sitting well with him, and it raised eyebrows among the other attorneys present.
Lawyers in the Jury Box?
The tension was palpable as the courtroom filled with legal heavyweights; twelve attorneys represented the plaintiffs, while only three defense attorneys sat observing. The image of attorneys squeezed into the jury box was nothing short of amusing — a courtroom version of musical chairs. Judge Failla noted that she initially aimed to reach a decision today but left feeling clouded by the density of the arguments. Her promise to rule by Thursday at 4 PM EST was met with a collective sigh from the lawyers.
+ There are no comments
Add yours