The variety of lawsuits towards former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried has been racking up for the reason that fall of his crypto empire, with the previous “white knight” of crypto discovering himself a defendant in seven class motion lawsuits filed since FTX’s chapter.
These lawsuits are separate from the quite a few probes and investigations analyzing FTX and Sam Bankman-Fried, reminiscent of a reported market manipulation probe by federal prosecutors and the Federal Election Fee’s probably investigation into Bankman-Frieds darkish cash donations to the Republican Social gathering.
Under is a abstract of the class-action lawsuits introduced towards Sam Bankman-Fried since Nov. 11.
Dec. 7: Podalsky et al. v. Bankman-Fried et al.
On this class-action lawsuit introduced by Gregg Podalsky and 4 different people, the previous FTX prospects accused Golden State Warriors, Bankman-Fried and quite a few different celebrities and FTX executives of fraudulently inducing “unsophisticated traders” into buying unregistered securities within the type of yield-bearing accounts, leading to prospects dropping billions of {dollars}.
Different public figures additionally named within the lawsuit are Tom Brady, Kevin O‘Leary, Stephen Curry, Trevor Lawrence and Shaquille O’Neal, with Podalsky demanding that the case have a jury trial.
Dec. 5: Jessup v. Bankman-Fried et al.
FTX buyer Michael Elliott Jessup has brought a class-action lawsuit towards Bankman-Fried, former Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison and different FTX executives, accusing them of fraud, unjust enrichment and conversion.
Unjust enrichment in authorized instances refers to conditions the place one individual is enriched on the expense of one other, in circumstances which the regulation sees as unjust, whereas conversion refers to conditions the place one individual ‘converts’ one other individual’s property for themselves.
Jessup, who has additionally demanded the case have a jury, alleges that prospects who held funds on FTX had rightful possession of their crypto belongings and that the defendants transferred these belongings to Alameda Analysis with out the authority to take action — which constitutes conversion within the eyes of Jessup’s attorneys.
Dec. 2: Hawkins v Bankman-Fried et al.
Filed in California, this lawsuit is a category motion brought by Russell Hawkins — an FTX buyer who held funds on the trade — on behalf of all these equally located and alleges that prospects had been misled by unfair and misleading practices.
The defendants embody Bankman Fried and different FTX executives, in addition to accounting companies Armanino and Prager Metis, who had issued licensed studies deeming FTX to be in good monetary well being, with the submitting noting:
“As set forth herein, the Particular person Defendants made statements concerning YBAs [Yield-bearing accounts] and the FTX Entities that had been unfaithful or deceptive. They publicly represented that the FTX Entities and YBAs had been a viable and secure method to spend money on crypto, an announcement designed to deceive shoppers into investing with the FTX Entities.”
Nov. 23: Pierce v. Bankman-Fried et al.
With the identical defendants because the Hawkins case, FTX buyer Stephen Pierce filed a class-action lawsuit in California accusing Bankman-Fried of being “one of many nice frauds of historical past,” and that he “and his interior circle handled these belongings as a slush fund to fund their very own proprietary investments and a wide range of private boondoggles.”
A jury has as soon as once more been demanded by the plaintiff (Pierce), who alleges that the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) has been violated.
Racketeering is a kind of organized crime during which an unlawful coordinated scheme or operation is ready up which allows the perpetrators to persistently accumulate a revenue.
Nov. 21: Kavuri v. Bankman-Fried et al.
FTX buyer Sunil Kavuri has filed a class-action lawsuit in Florida just like Podalsky v Bankman-Fried, in that the defendants listed embody celebrities or public figures which have endorsed or in any other case promoted FTX allegedly with out disclosing their fee or stake within the firm.
It’s also a case that the Securities and Trade Fee could also be protecting a detailed eye on, with Kavuri alleging that FTX was selling unregistered securities which had been fraudulently offered as securities in an effort to draw prospects and generate curiosity.
Nov. 20: Lam v. Bankman-Fried
Hong Kong resident and FTX buyer Elliot Lam is the plaintiff in one other class-action lawsuit filed in California, who alleges that Bankman-Fried, Ellison and the Golden State Warriors have violated California’s false promoting and unfair competitors legal guidelines and have additionally dedicated fraudulent concealment and civil conspiracy.
Lam claims that the defendants offered and marketed to the general public who couldn’t have recognized the “true nature of FTX and YBAs,” and that had the general public had the identical data because the defendants, they might not have chosen to make use of FTX’s merchandise — thus constituting fraudulent concealment.
Nov. 15: Garrison v. Bankman-Fried et al.
This lawsuit as soon as once more includes the total suite of superstar actors and public figures who’re understood to have endorsed or been concerned in advertising campaigns for FTX, the class-action lawsuit filed by Edwin Garrison in Florida alleges that FTX’s YBAs had been illegally supplied securities.
Associated: Sam Bankman-Fried misses deadline to answer testimony request, now what?
Garrison additionally accuses FTX of getting engaged in misleading and unfair enterprise practices, and was engaged in a “fraudulent scheme” that deliberately took benefit of “unsophisticated traders.”
As soon as these complaints and the mandatory paperwork had been filed, they got a docket quantity and instantly assigned to a decide. From there, every of the defendants is served with a summons and criticism, and the decide will set out a schedule outlining the following steps.
