Disclaimer: These summaries are provided for educational purposes only by Nelson Rosario and Stephen Palley. These are not legal advice. These opinions are only our opinions and are not authorized by a past, present or future client or employer. We could also change our minds. We have multitudes.
As always, the Rosario summaries are "NMR" and the Palley summaries, "SDP".
Sultan Coinbase, E.D.N.Y., 18-934, 1/24/19. [SDP]
The complainant sued Coinbase, alleging that it "neglected to prevent a fraud allowing a third party to steal more than $ 200,000 from his account. Coinbase has decided to use arbitration in accordance with a binding arbitration clause in its contract of use. "
The Court stated that "explicit acceptance" clearly indicated that the use of the site would be subject to reference conditions and "further urge a reasonably prudent user to click on the link to see what these conditions were." d & # 39; use ". before accepting. Thus, the plaintiff was in "notice of investigation" terms. Although he does not remember having clicked on the box "I certify, etc.", the presentation of the website was sufficiently clear to indicate that its use was conditional on the acceptance of the User Agreement, with its arbitration clause.
In short, the case has been suspended and the arbitration compelled. (By way of conclusion: that arbitration is better or worse is a matter of opinion.) In some cases, plaintiffs who have weaker arguments may actually do better in a private arbitration. 39 is not necessarily a loss for the plaintiff in the long run.
The Block is pleased to present a legal expert analysis of cryptocurrency, provided by Stephen Palley (@stephendpalley) and Nelson M. Rosario (@nelsonmrosario). They summarize each week three cryptocurrency cases and gave The Block permission to republish their comments and analyzes in full. Part II of this week's analysis, Crypto Caselaw Minute, is on top.