# kaal:claim:2992962-010

**Claim.** The authors treat the near absence of decided case law on crypto smart contracting disputes as evidence that the existing legal infrastructure is too far removed from crypto dispute resolution, or incapable of adequately addressing the disputes crypto transactions generate.

**Type.** empirical  **Support.** evidenced

**Holds when.**

- US federal and state case law searched before publication in 2017

**Source quote.**

> We see this lack of existing case law in the context of crypto smart contracting disputes as evidence that the existing legal infrastructure may be too far removed from crypto dispute resolution or incapable of adequately addressing the types of disputes generated by crypto transactions.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, *Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution* (2017), a) Courts on Cryptocurrencies and DLT Businesses, page 32

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `80b92e67594394e38af41b769327936833de8e25d6cf3def966a6ba13bc83d17` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Calcaterra%20-%202017%20-%20Crypto%20Transaction%20Dispute%20Resolution.pdf

**Topics.** systemic-risk, law-and-legal-systems

**Keywords.** case-law, crypto-dispute-resolution, courts, legal-infrastructure

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.