Judge Rejects Shift of XRP Lawsuit to Lesser Court
A US Judge has just rejected an attempt by an investor to have a lawsuit filed against Ripple to a lesser court. Judge Hamilton rejected an attempt by Ryan Coffey and his request to relocate his lawsuit against the company and its associated figures to San Francisco following Ripple's decision to raise the lawsuit to the nations District Court.
Lawsuit on Lawsuit
Ryan Coffey filed for legal action against Ripple in 2018 after accusing the company’s coin, the XRP, is classified as a security and being distributed by the company. Within his plea to move the case, he claimed that any court case acting as part of the Securities Act may be transferred to state courts and essentially stapled to the said court.
Despite this, Judge Phyllis stated that the current laws that Ryan had mentioned did not apply to the current case and that any federal court reserves the authority to replace the state court despite the fact that XRP is indeed considered a security due to the nature of this specific case and how it has become a nationwide matter. On the other hand, the accused company, Ripple, is utilizing the same argument as a means of relocating many of the other lawsuits pressed against the company.
More legal reports filed on the 8th of August reveal that Ripple had motioned for another removal of a lawsuit filed by Avner Greenwald earlier in August. The lawsuit was filed with San Mateo’s Supreme Court although the company is looking to move the case to Northern California as well, once again utilizing the same argument seen in Coffey’s suit. Additionally, the company is looking to bring both lawsuits together, arguing that trying both cases individually will create tedious and incredibly complex duplicative efforts in both labor and costs or even contradicting outcomes should two separate judges try the cases.
Jake Chervinsky, a lawyer, posted on Twitter on the 8th of August and stated that should the motion to relate be accepted, it would bring both cases under one court and one judge. A filing of the same nature during the previous week also saw the company attempt to manage more lawsuits filed by two other investors, stating that both these lawsuits included the same situation as the case by Avner.