Elon Musk and Tesla are seeking sanctions against lawyer Evan Spencer for allegedly making false insider trading accusations involving Dogecoin.

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, and his electric vehicle empire, are pushing back hard against a New York plaintiffs lawyer, Evan Spencer. The core of this dispute is the allegations of insider trading involving Musk and the well-known cryptocurrency Dogecoin.

The billionaire business magnate and his company argue that Spencer knowingly built his case on false pretenses. This has led Musk and Tesla to pursue Rule 11 sanctions against Spencer, who is acting as the legal representative for a group of Dogecoin investors.

Dissecting the Insider Trading Claims

Spencer has laid out a story where Musk and Tesla manipulated the market and then profited from their actions. In his narrative, he says that Musk made use of his strong social media presence, particularly Twitter, to ramp up the prices of Dogecoin. 

The profits, he alleges, came from selling off Dogecoin that was held in eight different cryptocurrency wallets. The twist, according to a motion filed by Musk and Tesla, is that they did not own any of these eight wallets. They further contend that Spencer should have doubted this even before presenting his insider trading allegations.

What makes this case even more intriguing are the prior claims and counterclaims. Musk and Tesla had already denied owning one of the wallets specified in an earlier version of the lawsuit. And, surprisingly, even Spencer himself acknowledged this in a previous Dogecoin complaint, attributing the wallet ownership to Robinhood, a trading platform.

Spencer’s Response to Legal Warnings

Following the June 7 filing of Spencer’s revised complaint, Musk’s defense lawyers from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan issued a stern warning. The defense lawyers, led by Alex Spiro, clarified in no uncertain terms that neither Musk nor Tesla owned the disputed wallets or had sold any Dogecoin. 

They cautioned Spencer about the impending sanctions if he didn’t withdraw the lawsuit. Spencer, however, dismissed the warnings and instead attempted to disqualify Quinn Emanuel, citing a conflict of interest in their dual representation of Musk and Tesla.

To strengthen their rebuttal, the latest sanctions motion by Musk and Tesla is backed by sworn declarations, denying the ownership of the disputed wallets. Jared Birchall, who heads Musk’s family office, Excession LLC, stated unequivocally that Musk did not own any of the wallets implicated in the complaint. 

He further mentioned that Musk did not engage in any Dogecoin sales through any other crypto wallets. Likewise, Tesla’s compliance director, Suk Patel, denied any involvement of the company with the alleged wallets and affirmed that Tesla had never traded in Dogecoin.

Calls for Dismissal and Fee Reimbursement

Spencer’s accusations hinge on the premise that the wallets in question sold Dogecoin at a time when their prices were high. Musk and Tesla’s firm denial of owning these wallets calls Spencer’s recent claims into question, branding them as unfounded. 

Therefore, Musk and Tesla have requested U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein of Manhattan to dismiss the lawsuit and additionally, hold Spencer accountable for their fees and costs.

Despite the persuasive counterarguments of Musk and Tesla, Spencer has shown no signs of retreating. He recently filed a reply brief related to his move to disqualify Quinn Emanuel, challenging their allegations of conflict and unethical conduct. This insistence on his part to pursue the case suggests that the legal battle is far from over and could have significant implications moving forward.

The Decisive Role of Wallet Ownership Evidence

While the high-profile war of words is riveting, the core of the issue lies in proving the ownership of the disputed cryptocurrency wallets. These are pivotal to Spencer’s insider trading claims against Musk and Tesla. 

Now that Musk and Tesla have presented sworn affidavits denying their ownership, the burden of proof shifts to Spencer. If he possesses any evidence that can contest these declarations, it is high time to present it. 

In other news, just recently, Senator Warren recently requested that the SEC needs to investigate Elon Musk. If that happens, there will be more scrutiny on Musk’s actions, which would not play well for his other legal battles.

The post Elon Musk Strikes Back on Insider Trading Accusations appeared first on Crypto Academy.