As a seasoned researcher with years of experience in the dynamic and often unpredictable world of cryptocurrencies, I find myself intrigued by this latest development between Swan Bitcoin and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. The situation seems fraught with potential conflicts of interest, which is not uncommon in this fast-paced industry where relationships can shift as quickly as the value of a coin on the market.
As a crypto investor, I found myself in an interesting predicament when my trusted financial services company, Swan Bitcoin, took legal action against Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher – a law firm that I still consider part of my team. This move came about due to the hiring of a lawyer by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher who is currently representing Tether, a stablecoin issuer and fierce competitor in the crypto market.
On November 22, Swan filed a lawsuit against Gibson in California’s Superior Court, alleging malpractice. Swan claims that Gibson lured them into representation, only to later take on their former rival, Tether, as a client and effectively dismiss Swan from the case.
As a crypto investor, I was informed by Swan that one of Gibson’s lawyers reached out to their CEO, Cory Klippsten, stating that due to Gibson hiring attorney Barry Berke – who also represents Tether – it might lead to a potential conflict of interest, and therefore, Swan would have to seek legal representation elsewhere.
In September, Swan, represented by Gibson, took legal action against a number of ex-employees. The allegation is that these individuals illegally obtained Swan’s software code to establish a cryptocurrency mining firm named Proton Management.
According to Swan, Proton persuaded Tether to sever ties with Swan in favor of Proton. However, Tether denies these accusations and is not being sued by Swan.
On November 24th, Gibson officially requested to no longer represent Swan in their legal dispute with Proton, citing a total collapse of the lawyer-client partnership.
The statement implicated Swan’s lawsuit against the law firm, stating that he asserted they “would ‘absolutely never’ cover the legal fees they owe” and “requested a significant amount of money, approximately millions,” in exchange for not challenging Gibson’s withdrawal from the litigation.
On November 25th, Swan petitioned the Superior Court of California for an emergency injunction, aiming to prevent Gibson from exiting their ongoing lawsuit against Proton, and to prohibit Gibson from taking on Tether as a new client during that legal dispute.
The statement suggests that Gibson allegedly breached the “Hot Potato” principle in legal ethics, which means it’s considered unprofessional for attorneys to discontinue representing a client to dodge potential conflicts of interest.
A hearing for the restraining order is scheduled for Nov. 26.
Read More
- HBAR PREDICTION. HBAR cryptocurrency
- IMX PREDICTION. IMX cryptocurrency
- STEEM PREDICTION. STEEM cryptocurrency
- JTO PREDICTION. JTO cryptocurrency
- POL PREDICTION. POL cryptocurrency
- LDO PREDICTION. LDO cryptocurrency
- MNT PREDICTION. MNT cryptocurrency
- TRB PREDICTION. TRB cryptocurrency
- FLOKI PREDICTION. FLOKI cryptocurrency
- COW PREDICTION. COW cryptocurrency
2024-11-26 09:14