Hancock Leasing Company Wins Dismissal of Counterclaim in Breach of Contract Dispute

Paul, Weiss secured a significant victory for Hancock Leasing Company LLC in a contract dispute when the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio dismissed a defendant’s counterclaim against Hancock with prejudice, before the defendant filed opposition papers.

Hancock, a subsidiary of MARA Holdings, Inc., a digital asset technology and cryptocurrency mining company, filed suit against Solvenz Server Farms IV, LLC and Hypertec Construction Inc. in December 2025, alleging that Solvenz failed to perform its contractual obligations to construct, procure and install fixed assets at a data center facility in Findlay, Ohio, and deliver to Hancock a fully functional turnkey facility. After the court denied Solvenz’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in June, Solvenz asserted a breach of contract counterclaim against Hancock, premised on two theories: that Hancock breached the parties’ agreement by failing to pay Solvenz a portion of the bitcoin mining profits generated at the site, and that Hancock failed to provide Solvenz accounting records concerning its revenues and profits.

Paul, Weiss argued that the clear and unambiguous terms of the parties’ agreement, as well as binding judicial admissions in the record of the case, foreclosed both theories of breach. On the first theory, Paul, Weiss demonstrated that the agreement expressly conditions any obligation by Hancock to pay bitcoin mining profits on Solvenz “not [being] in default of its obligations,” language that creates a condition precedent requiring Solvenz’s own performance. Solvenz’s own binding judicial admissions conclusively established that Solvenz could not satisfy the condition precedent to Hancock’s payment obligation.

On the second theory, Paul, Weiss showed that the agreement imposes no obligation on Hancock to maintain or provide accounting records, and that Solvenz’s contrary reading rested on a mischaracterization of an exhibit to the agreement.

U.S. District Court Judge Jack Zouhary agreed and granted the motion to dismiss the counterclaim from the bench at a status conference, concluding that he did not need to review Solvenz’s opposition brief in order to determine that the counterclaim was without merit. Judge Zouhary also denied Solvenz’s oral application to amend the counterclaim, finding that the counterclaim rested on documents that the court had reviewed and that “those documents do not support the counterclaim.”

The Paul, Weiss team includes litigation partner Gregory Laufer and counsel Phoebe King, who argued the motion.