Ripple CTO David Schwartz didn't mince words this week, dismissing a cryptocurrency lawsuit seeking a staggering $293 billion as 'comically bad.' The suit, filed by an anonymous plaintiff, claims ownership of more than 39,000 dormant Bitcoin wallets under New York's lost-and-found laws. Schwartz's blunt assessment comes as the crypto industry continues to face a wave of speculative litigation, but this one stands out for its sheer size — and the confusion over how much is actually being demanded.
The $293 billion claim
The complaint, filed in New York, targets a massive trove of Bitcoin wallets that have sat untouched for years. The plaintiff argues they have a legal right to these assets under state statutes governing unclaimed property. The number itself is eye-popping: $293 billion, according to the lawsuit's body. But a discrepancy in reporting has already surfaced — the article's title pegs the demand at $286 billion. It's unclear whether the difference is a typo or reflects a shifting calculation, but it adds to the general messiness of the case.
What Schwartz actually said
Schwartz, known for his technical deep dives and occasional bluntness, called the lawsuit 'comically bad' in a social media post. He didn't offer a detailed legal analysis — just a frank dismissal. The timing isn't great for the anonymous filer, either. Courts have grown skeptical of sweeping claims over dormant crypto assets, especially when the plaintiff hides behind anonymity. Schwartz's take probably mirrors what many in the industry are thinking: this one isn't going anywhere.
The anonymous plaintiff problem
The plaintiff filed under a pseudonym, which is unusual for a case of this magnitude. New York's lost-and-found laws typically require a clear chain of ownership, and proving that over 39,000 wallets belong to one person is a tall order — even with a name attached. Without one, the suit faces an uphill battle from the start. Legal experts might debate the merits, but Schwartz's 'comically bad' label captures the vibe. It's hard to see a judge taking this seriously when the basic facts are so fuzzy.
What comes next
The court will have to decide whether to even let the case proceed. Given the anonymity, the gigantic sum, and the mismatch between the title and body figures, dismissal seems likely. Schwartz, meanwhile, has moved on. But the episode highlights how dormant Bitcoin wallets continue to attract legal vultures, even when the claims border on absurd. For now, the 39,000 wallets stay put.
