Oded Meltzer, et al. v. NMS Capital Group LLC, et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-23068-UU

Oct 06, 2017

OUTCOME: Obtained final judgment and permanent injunction in favor of plaintiffs before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Action filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida seeking a declaration that principals of a limited liability company could not be held individually liable under wr ... itten contracts entered into on behalf of limited liability company and further seeking to enjoin defendant corporate entities from joining individuals into pending arbitration proceedings with the limited liability company or otherwise attempting to pursue claims under the written contracts. Obtained a preliminary injunction (on the papers, without oral argument) enjoining the defendants from joining the individual plaintiffs into the pending arbitration and thereafter obtained a final judgment declaring that the individuals could not be held personally liable under the written contracts and permanently enjoining the defendants from pursuing claims under the written contracts.

Yehezkel Nissenbaum, et al. v. AIM Recovery Services, Inc., Case No. 3D15-1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)

Dec 23, 2015

OUTCOME: Authored the answer brief and litigated an appeal before the Florida Third District Court of Appeal that resulted in a per curiam affirmance upholding a final judgment exceeding $125,000.00

Michael Sizemore, et al. v. Changpeng Zhao, et al., No. 23-cv-21261-ALTMAN/Reid (S.D. Fla. Apr. 9, 2026)

N/A

OUTCOME: Motion to Compel Arbitration Denied in Federal Class Action Against Binance

Successfully opposed a motion to compel arbitration in a federal class action pending in the Southern District of Florida against Binance and related entities. The defendants—who were not signatories t ... o the governing Terms of Use—argued they could nevertheless force plaintiffs into arbitration under theories of delegation and equitable estoppel. The Court rejected those arguments and denied the motion in full, holding that non-signatories cannot compel arbitration absent a valid agreement with the plaintiffs, and that equitable estoppel does not apply where the claims are not grounded in the underlying contract. The Court also declined to extend delegation principles to allow non-signatories to decide arbitrability. This decision reinforces important limits on the use of arbitration provisions in complex litigation—particularly where corporate entities attempt to rely on contractual relationships they did not enter into. The ruling preserves plaintiffs’ ability to litigate claims in federal court and reflects a broader trend of courts scrutinizing efforts to expand arbitration beyond its contractual foundations.