Craig Wright files strong Motion for Summary Judgment against Ira Kleiman

The turbulent Kleiman v. Wright lawsuit has taken another turn this week, with a bombshell filing casting significant doubt on narrative spun in the Ira Kleiman complaint.

Kleiman’s long-standing lawsuit against Bitcoin inventor Dr. Craig Wright has been fraught with obtuse and often conflicting characterisations of the relationship between Wright, Ira’s brother Dave Kleiman and their alleged business W&K. This latest development may shed some much-needed light on the actual business relationship between the key figures in the Kleiman litigation, and in any case, exposes the gaps in Kleiman’s version of events in which he says that not only did his brother and Wright invent and mine Bitcoin together, but that Wright defrauded the Kleiman estate of the Bitcoin mined.

Craig Wright asks for Kleiman lawsuit to be thrown out

Craig Wright filed a scathing motion for summary judgment in the case on Friday, asking that the judge rule in favour of Wright in the lawsuit and calling the plaintiff’s complaint ‘an elaborate fiction.’

The motion slams Ira Kleiman’s actions leading up to and throughout the proceedings, pointing out that W&K was served all appropriate notices with respect to the transfer of property to Wright, which puts Kleiman’s claims outside of the statute of limitations in Florida.

Wright points out that even if the action was not barred by the statute of limitations, it would be unenforceable because the Statute of Frauds precludes the enforcement of contracts not intended to be performed within a year (the oral partnership alleged by Kleiman was on a three-year basis) and even then, Ira Kleiman has submitted no evidence as to the structure and terms of the partnership.

In addition, Wright stated in the motion for summary judgment and provided proof that W&K was indeed served legally by the Australian court which contradicts Ira’s statement when he swore under oath that he was not informed of the lawsuit that Wright filed against W&K in Australia. In fact, the motion for summary judgment states that W&K was successfully served in October 2013 for that case which is why Ira hired a lawyer when he spoke to Craig about this in 2014. It appears Ira has defrauded the court and committed perjury in his sworn testimony.

Stay tuned for more CoinGeek coverage of the Kleiman v Wright case over the next several days. 

New to blockchain? Check out CoinGeek’s Blockchain for Beginners section, the ultimate resource guide to learn more about blockchain technology.