Fenwick Seeks Dismissal of New FTT Securities and Fund-Misuse Allegations in FTX Case

• Fenwick says the amended claims are untimely and futile, denying wrongdoing.

• Plaintiffs rely on Nishad Singh testimony and new FTT securities allegations.

• Plaintiffs added securities claims after similar suits persisted against third parties; court decision pending.

Fenwick FTX lawsuit: Fenwick seeks dismissal of new investor claims; read the ruling timeline and next steps. Learn more via COINOTAG.

Fenwick asked a Florida judge to dismiss new FTX fraud claims, calling investor allegations of fund misuse and FTT promotion untimely and false.

Fenwick & West has asked a Florida federal judge to dismiss an attempt by victims of the collapsed FTX exchange to add new claims against the firm. The law practice labeled accusations that it knowingly enabled the misuse of customer funds as “an irresponsible falsehood.”

What is the Fenwick FTX lawsuit about?

Fenwick FTX lawsuit allegations center on whether Fenwick knowingly aided misuse of FTX customer funds and assisted promotion of FTT. Fenwick says proposed amendments are untimely and rest on long-available information, maintaining its role was limited to routine legal services rather than facilitating fraud.

How did Nishad Singh’s testimony affect the amended claims?

The new complaint cites testimony from Nishad Singh, FTX’s former lead engineer, about founder loans. Fenwick counters that Singh described ordinary corporate loan structuring, not evidence that lawyers assisted in hiding misuse of customer funds. During related proceedings, dozens of witnesses testified the fraud occurred without knowledge of in-house counsel or external advisors.

Why does Fenwick call the securities claims frivolous?

Plaintiffs added FTT securities claims, alleging Fenwick assisted in launching and promoting the token in violation of state securities laws. Fenwick dismissed these counts as “frivolous” and belated, noting similar claims previously targeted other advisers and celebrity endorsers and were later litigated or dismissed. Fenwick argues plaintiffs present no new evidence tying the firm to securities violations.

When will the court decide on the amended complaint?

The court has not yet ruled on whether to accept the amended complaint. Fenwick filed a motion to dismiss based on timeliness and lack of plausibility. A judge’s decision date remains pending; meanwhile, FTX is preparing another round of creditor repayments scheduled at the end of September 2025.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can Fenwick be held liable for FTX customer fund misuse?

Under the amended complaint, plaintiffs allege Fenwick aided misuse of funds; Fenwick argues there is no factual support and that routine legal work does not equate to aiding fraud. Liability hinges on whether the court finds plausible, time-barred, or new factual allegations sufficient to overcome dismissal standards.

What evidence do plaintiffs cite against Fenwick?

Plaintiffs cite testimony from Nishad Singh and new securities-focused allegations tied to promotion of FTT. Fenwick counters that testimony reflected routine loan practices and that plaintiffs rely on information publicly available for years.

How will this affect other FTX-related claims?

If the court allows the amended complaint, similar claims against other advisers could proceed; if dismissed, it may limit late-stage amendments across FTX-related litigation. The decision could influence creditor recoveries and remaining litigation timelines.

Key Takeaways

• Fenwick denies wrongdoing: The firm calls new claims untimely and unsupported by the cited testimony.
• Evidence in dispute: Plaintiffs point to Nishad Singh’s testimony and FTT promotion allegations; Fenwick says those facts do not show legal culpability.
• Next steps: The court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss will determine whether the amended complaint proceeds; FTX creditor repayments are scheduled for late September 2025.

Conclusion

The Fenwick FTX lawsuit presents a test of timeliness and factual sufficiency in post-bankruptcy litigation. Fenwick’s motion frames the amendments as futile and repetitive, while plaintiffs pursue expanded securities claims tied to FTT. The court’s upcoming decision will shape remaining claims and creditor recovery timelines; follow COINOTAG for updates.