Dogecoin’s Day in Court
A Tale of Two Crypto Cases
FINCast Ep. 38 – The Future of Crypto: A Conversation with Coinbase’s Faryar Shirzad
Digital Assets: The Evolving Landscape from a Regulatory, Litigation & Tax Standpoint – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 62
On May 23, 2024, the United States Supreme Court decided Coinbase, Inc., v. Suski, No. 23-3, serving a reminder to companies with mandatory consumer-facing arbitration provisions that contractual consistency is a key to...more
On May 23, the Supreme Court issued a decision holding that when parties have two conflicting contracts – one that sends disputes to arbitration and one that sends disputes to the courts – a court, not an arbitrator, must...more
In 23-3 Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski (05/23/2024) (supremecourt.gov) (May 23, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court once again delved into the frequently litigated arena of arbitration agreements. Specifically, the Court considered...more
When there are two conflicting contracts—one requiring a court to address whether a case should be decided by arbitration or court action, and another requiring an arbitrator to address that issue—who decides which contract...more
On May 23, 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that when parties have agreed to more than one contract – one that contains a clause sending threshold arbitrability questions to an arbitrator and one that sends those...more
SCOTUS has once again clarified a court’s power to compel arbitration, this time in the context of conflicting delegation clauses. In doing so, the Court aptly acknowledged its standing tri-layered analysis of arbitral...more
The Supreme Court gave us another arbitration decision yesterday (May 23rd)—the second in the span of a week. This one is Coinbase v. Suski, which poses the following question: “Where parties have agreed to two contracts —...more
On May 23, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski et al., unanimously affirming the Ninth Circuit’s decision holding that when parties have agreed to two contracts — one sending arbitrability...more
Takeaway: In Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski, No. 23-3, 2024 WL 2333424 (U.S. May 23, 2024), the Supreme Court unanimously held that where parties have agreed to two contracts – one with an arbitration clause and one without – the...more
On May 23, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Coinbase, Inc., v. Suski, No. 23-3, holding that when parties have agreed to two contracts — the first sending arbitrability disputes to arbitration, and the second sending...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions today: Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, No. 22-807: This case concerns the interplay between allegations of racial and partisan...more
According to a recent Bloomberg Law article [subscription required], in the past year there has been a sharp decline in active civil suits against cryptocurrency exchanges, digital wallet, mobile phone providers and others...more
Noting the court was deciding, as a matter of first impression, “what a party must do to specifically challenge a delegation provision and what a court may consider when evaluating this challenge,” the Ninth Circuit Court of...more
The United States Supreme Court recently granted a petition for certiorari to review a Ninth Circuit decision and resolve the issue of whether, when parties enter into an arbitration agreement with a delegation clause, the...more
On November 3, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in 3 cases: Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski, No. 23-3: This case concerns the enforceability of “delegation clauses” in arbitration agreements. A...more
On October 10, 2023, California Governor Newsom signed into law S.B. 365, a bill that amends California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1294. The new law provides that when a party appeals an order denying a motion to compel...more
Currently, California trial court proceedings are automatically stayed when a party appeals an order denying a motion to compel arbitration. However, on October 10, 2023, Governor Newsom signed California Senate Bill No. 365...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2023 decision in Coinbase Inc. v. Bielski requires that district court litigation in any matter remain in the starting gate while any appeal from a denial of a motion to compel arbitration in...more
In a victory for parties seeking to compel arbitration, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a district court must stay the proceedings when a party seeks interlocutory appeal of an order denying a motion to compel arbitration....more
In a recent 5-4 decision reversing the Ninth Circuit and settling a circuit split, the Supreme Court of the United States in Coinbase v. Bielski held that a district court must stay its proceedings while an interlocutory...more
Takeaway: The U.S. Supreme Court recently settled a circuit split by ruling that proceedings in a district court are automatically stayed when a party seeks an interlocutory appeal of a district court’s denial of a motion to...more
While several recent Supreme Court decisions have garnered significant headlines, the Court’s late June ruling in Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski, (Case No. 22-15), likely flew under the radar for the national media outlets. For...more
Every day, untold thousands get online to buy goods, book services, or sell something. And almost without fail, they are greeted with a Terms and Conditions pop-up. Then, perhaps the most common human experience of the...more
In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court recently rendered its decision in Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski, a case that carries profound implications for staying district court cases during appeals challenging denials of...more
By John S. Delikanakis On June 23, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Coinbase v. Bielski that U.S. district court proceedings are automatically stayed during a non-frivolous appeal of a denied motion to compel arbitration....more