Sarcuni v. bZx DAO
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
664 F.Supp.3d 1100 (S.D. Cal. 2023)
- Written by Brianna Pine, JD
Facts
The bZx Protocol (protocol) was a decentralized finance application that enabled users to engage in cryptocurrency transactions. The protocol was initially controlled by bZeroX LLC and Leveragebox LLC (defendants), entities cofounded by Tom Bean and Kyle Kistner (defendants). In August 2021, control of the protocol was transferred to the bZx DAO (DAO) (defendant), a decentralized autonomous organization controlled by persons holding BZRX tokens—a cryptocurrency issued by the DAO (tokenholders). Kistner publicly stated that the shift to community control was intended to avoid regulatory-compliance obligations. As part of the transition, bZeroX LLC transferred approximately $80 million in assets to the DAO and dissolved, leaving the DAO responsible for maintaining and developing the protocol. Tokenholders possessed governance rights, including the power to propose and vote on actions such as treasury spending, policy changes, and distributions. Tokenholders also allegedly shared in the protocol’s profits. In November 2021, a hacker infiltrated the protocol, resulting in a loss of roughly $55 million. Several affected users (plaintiffs) filed a putative class action alleging that tokenholders were general partners in a partnership formed by the DAO and were therefore jointly and severally liable for the protocol’s negligence that led to the hack. The DAO moved to dismiss, arguing that treating all tokenholders as general partners would constitute an improper expansion of partnership law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Burns, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 904,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 995 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

