Vanbex team faces another suit for alleged fraudulent inducement and negligent misrepresentation

Quick Take

  • StoAmigo previously brought a case against Vanbex and the pair behind it, Cheng and Hobbs, in California, but they were dismissed due to lack of personal jurisdiction
  • Now, StoAmigo is bringing another case against Cheng and Hobbs in Nevada, alleging fraudulent inducement and negligent misrepresentation.
  • There are likely sufficient contacts in Nevada for the case to proceed, unlike in California

Disclaimer: These summaries are provided for educational purposes only by Nelson Rosario and Stephen Palley. They are not legal advice. These are our opinions only, aren’t authorized by any past, present or future client or employer. Also we might change our minds. We contain multitudes.

As always, Rosario summaries are “NMR” and Palley summaries are “SDP".

[related id=1] StoAmigo International, LLC v. Cheng and Hobbs, Case №2:19-cv-00900 (D. Nev. filed May 28, 2019)[NMR]
Long time readers of the Crypto Caselaw Minute may recognize the StoAmigo name. That’s because we covered their pending lawsuit in the Central District of California back in January. Wait, this case is in Nevada and doesn’t involve Vanbex, and in the case in California Cheng and Hobbs were dismissed from the case. Well, you know what they say. “If at first you don’t succeed (first you don’t succeed), Dust yourself off, and try again...” (RIP Aaliyah)

A brief refresher is in order, as this newly filed suit in Nevada is basically the same suit that was filed in California. StoAmigo is not a typical blockchain company. As I put it in January,

“No, in this suit the plaintiff is actually an established company that already had users, and revenue, and was a real-life company! They just happened to want to get in on the blockchain train with a new product/service line. That’s when they met the team at the Vanbex Group, and well, here we are.”

Who is the team at Vanbex? Cheng and Hobbs. They are now being sued again this time in Nevada for the same things that they were sued for in California. Fraudulent inducement, and negligent misrepresentation to the tune of at least $80,000 paid to Vanbex to help promote a token sale. They were being sued in California, because there was a clause in the services agreement they signed that said the agreement would be governed by the laws of California. This is known as a forum-selection clause.

THE SCOOP

Keep up with the latest news, trends, charts and views on crypto and DeFi with a new biweekly newsletter from The Block's Frank Chaparro