To anyone who think I will make a $1B out of the lawsuit, this is not going to happen. The amount was just to get the attention of NYDFS before I could legally sue them in court.
Thursday I participated in a Blockchain event and I was asked if I knew why Benjamin Lawsky left New York Departement of Financial Services.
My answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Z1FO4m8BVQ&t=3m38s
Theo Chino
Update on the case: http://www.article78againstnydfs.com/testimony.php
Topic: Bitcoin nut job sues NY State for $1 Billion (Read 2952 times)
Round one - one done; going for round one - two.
https://bitcoincenternyc.com/bitcoin-news/new-yorks-bitlicense-challenged-court
https://bitcoincenternyc.com/bitcoin-news/new-yorks-bitlicense-challenged-court
He's going to lose and if they counter sue he will wish he was dead once they are thru with him. 
http://thedashtimes.com/2017/03/04/bitlicense-court-case-coming-end-soon/
“The judge assigned to this case is known and respected for her unbiased approach; we are confident that her ruling will be fair,” Chino said to The Dash Times.
Sueing the richest state in all of the United States?
Is he bonkers in Yonkers?
He's going to lose and if they counter sue he will wish he was dead once they are thru with him.
Is he bonkers in Yonkers?
He's going to lose and if they counter sue he will wish he was dead once they are thru with him.
John R. Levine possible explanation would be better for us,,,,,,
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/an-ubernerd-weighs-in/?_r=1
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/an-ubernerd-weighs-in/?_r=1
Thanks for that article; it does answer a question I asked in another thread.
Yes at this time anyone else would be better ... but we have to use the cards we are handed.
The problem is that we are at the motion stage and we can't introduce new evidence or witnesses except to answer a question raised by the other party.
The other party quoted him to say that Bitcoin is money; he is a local resident, it is not hard for the court to ask him to come and explain his reasoning. Unfortunately we can't ask for someone else. While he is there, he can validate Professor Bitcorn's theories as well by saying Bitcoin is not money like they did in Florida.
John R. Levine possible explanation would be better for us,,,,,,
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/an-ubernerd-weighs-in/?_r=1
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/an-ubernerd-weighs-in/?_r=1
Internet's impact on the economy has been no greater than fax machine's.(dead wrong) trillions of dollars are in internet circulating.
LMFAO Paul Krugman? http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-bitcoin-2013-12
What is the reason to post that link? did you want us to die of laughter?For the last two years Milly Bitcoin has been trolling me ..... so I like to oblige his ego.
Yes, having to argue why Paul Krugman should be subpoena is kind of funny; I can tell the story on this board. A lawyer reading trough the briefs can figure it out. All the docs are here: http://www.article78againstnydfs.com/docs/Index-101880-15 (The first one was done by me, not a lawyer, but the rest was writen by real lawyers.)
The reason I sued for a $1B is to grab DFS attention. In court claim, when suing the state, the amount requested is irrelevant, I could have put $1 Centillion that it did not change the arguments of the case; however it establish something.
Even the judge explain that in it's answer: 1. Defendant also argues for dismissal on the ground that claimant's "potential" injury "was not proven or otherwise substantiated," since there was "no documentary evidence annexed to the claim or a rational basis expressed to support" the contention that claimant had suffered $1 billion in damages (Aff. in Supp. ¶
. This particular argument cannot serve as a basis for dismissal In a motion, like this one, that seeks dismissal based on the pleadings, there is no requirement that the claimant "substantiate" or provide "documentary evidence" for its damages claims. Further, although defendant cites CPLR 3212, the summary judgment provision, its motion seeks dismissal on the face of the claim, and is properly viewed through the lens of CPLR 3211. Anyway, the REAL trial will be on 3/16/2017 at 9:30 and the New York Departement of Financial Services will have to explain how it reached the conclusion that Bitcoin is Money. A judge in Florida said it was not.
https://www.meetup.com/Article-78-Against-NYDFS/events/238080585
Internet's impact on the economy has been no greater than fax machine's.(dead wrong) trillions of dollars are in internet circulating.
LMFAO Paul Krugman? http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-bitcoin-2013-12
What is the reason to post that link? did you want us to die of laughter?
Yep, does that make me crazy ?
LMFAO Paul Krugman? http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-bitcoin-2013-12
LMFAO Paul Krugman? http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-bitcoin-2013-12
Thread title is correct i have had enough of NY and that dam lolsky guy also time to sue
Maybe I'm just capitulating here, but I think we're in a lot of trouble in terms of Bitcoin's long-term viability.
The new FinCEN ruling today, might just be the "writing on the wall". IMO.
The new FinCEN ruling today, might just be the "writing on the wall". IMO.
they just applied their well-known rules. I don't see it as much of a change at all.
Some nut job is on reddit looking for legal advice for the lawsuit he filed:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2kh53h/need_new_york_state_legal_case_to_show_the/
http://www.article78againstnydfs.com/Lawsuit/
He is focusing on the fact the answer from the State of NY points out that he sued the wrong party. He doesn't mention the main reason for the request for dismissal is that he failed to show any link between proposing rules and him losing $1 Billion. He also send rambling letters to the Court how Lawsky is screwing up the proposed regs and he even mention p2p technology and issues with gold as a commodity. He says he will drop the case if the State drops the BitLicense proposal ... as if the court clerk is going to go over to Ben Lawsky and end the proposed license.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2kh53h/need_new_york_state_legal_case_to_show_the/
http://www.article78againstnydfs.com/Lawsuit/
He is focusing on the fact the answer from the State of NY points out that he sued the wrong party. He doesn't mention the main reason for the request for dismissal is that he failed to show any link between proposing rules and him losing $1 Billion. He also send rambling letters to the Court how Lawsky is screwing up the proposed regs and he even mention p2p technology and issues with gold as a commodity. He says he will drop the case if the State drops the BitLicense proposal ... as if the court clerk is going to go over to Ben Lawsky and end the proposed license.
Jump to: