I just finished reading Judge Torres' 57-page ruling on the admissibility of expert testimony in SEC v. Ripple.
As a trial lawyer who handled a number of securities cases in the Southern District of New York, I have 5 takeaways from the Judge's Order.
As a trial lawyer who handled a number of securities cases in the Southern District of New York, I have 5 takeaways from the Judge's Order.
1/ The Judge's rulings on admissibility are legally sound and unlikely to be disturbed on appeal--which is no surprise.
The Judge demonstrates a good grasp of XRP and the related technology and excellent command of the legal issues, claims and defenses in the case.
The Judge demonstrates a good grasp of XRP and the related technology and excellent command of the legal issues, claims and defenses in the case.
2/ Both sides (appropriately) pushed the envelope on the expert testimony they wanted to submit, so it is no surprise that both sides had some testimony excluded.
The judge drew the line in a consistent manner, with no bias or leanings or tea leaves discernible to me.
The judge drew the line in a consistent manner, with no bias or leanings or tea leaves discernible to me.
3/ The Judge sustained Ripple's objection to expert testimony the SEC wanted to offer about the intentions of XRP purchasers.
This is a setback for the SEC because the reasonable expectations of purchasers is a component of the Howey test for defining an investment contract.
This is a setback for the SEC because the reasonable expectations of purchasers is a component of the Howey test for defining an investment contract.
4/ The Judge overruled the SEC's objections to expert testimony that:
-XRP is not treated as a security in the IRS Code;
-XRP should not be treated as a security under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP);
-XRP has "commercial utility" in a number of use cases.
-XRP is not treated as a security in the IRS Code;
-XRP should not be treated as a security under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP);
-XRP has "commercial utility" in a number of use cases.
4.1/ Expert testimony that XRP is not a security for purposes of the IRS Code, GAAP and many commercial uses are simple concepts that would be easily understood by jurors-- should this case proceed to trial.
5/ Bottom line as I see it, these rulings were a net positive for Ripple and for XRP holders.
Does this necessarily mean Ripple will win the case on summary judgment? No.
But, I do think these rulings make a summary judgment win for the SEC unlikely.
Does this necessarily mean Ripple will win the case on summary judgment? No.
But, I do think these rulings make a summary judgment win for the SEC unlikely.
Given the extensive legal analysis of claims and defenses that went into these rulings, I believe the Judge is probably close to issuing a decision on the summary judgment motions.
The full decision on admissibility of expert testimony is available here.
dropbox.com/s/auy95flzerbd…
The full decision on admissibility of expert testimony is available here.
dropbox.com/s/auy95flzerbd…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
