Self-proclaimed Bitcoin creator Craig Wright is prepared to challenge the recent court ruling against him, which ordered him to turn over half of his Bitcoin holdings to the estate of David Klieman.
According to a court document filed by Wright’s attorney Andres Rivero, the defendant is seeking a 14-day extension to file a motion challenging the rule by Judge Bruce Reinhart of Southern District of Florida court.
“Dr. Wright does not concede that Magistrate Reinhardt had the power to enter the order that he did. However, the time frame that arguably could apply to addressing the legal validity of the purported order would be the 14-day time frame set forth in Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” the court document noted.
Costing half of Wright’s fortune
The judgment was passed by Judge Reinhart on the Kleiman v. Wright case on August 26 in favor of the estate of Kleiman, ordering Wright to turn over half of his Bitcoins mined by him until December 31, 2013, along with the intellectual property (IP) rights of Bitcoin’s software.
Why Your Enterprise’s Finances Rely on Employee TrainingGo to article >>
Although the original date to bring a motion challenging the order is due on September 10, Wright’s attorney is requesting to push the date to September 24, citing the chaos created by hurricane Dorian in central and south Florida.
“Central and South Florida are currently threatened by a major hurricane. Hurricane Dorian is expected to make landfall in Florida early next week and counsel for Dr. Wright have been expending significant time preparing for the hurricane, which has limited their ability to work on this matter,” the filing added.
The attorney also concluded that the request to extend the date was “brought in good faith” rather than for the “purposes of delay.”
The original lawsuit was brought by Ira Kleiman, the brother of Wright’s former business partner David Kleiman, for $10 billion, accusing him of seizing Bitcoin’s of his deceased business partner.
The Florida court earlier rejected Wright’s testimony on the grounds of perjury and falsifying documents.