CustodyStress
Archive › Multisig quorum failure
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01408

Multisig quorum failure — hardware wallet — United States 2025

Indeterminate
Case description
A 2025 estate case involved a 2-of-3 multisig wallet where the deceased holder had kept one key, a professional fiduciary firm held the second, and a hardware key was stored in a bank safety deposit box. After the holder's death, the executor opened the safety deposit box to retrieve the third key. However, the key stored there was for an older version of the same wallet—the holder had migrated to a new multisig arrangement in 2023 but had not updated the safety deposit box contents. The outdated key was useless for the current wallet. With only the fiduciary firm's key and the deceased holder's key (which the executor held), the estate was one key short of quorum for the updated wallet.
Custody context
Stress conditionMultisig quorum failure
Custody systemHardware wallet (single key)
OutcomeIndeterminate
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2025
CountryUnited States
What this illustrates
The setup required multiple people to sign off. Not enough of them were available. It's not clear whether anyone ever regained access.
Outcome interpretation
Not enough information is available to determine the outcome.
Source
Privately Reported
Evidence type
News article
Evidence link
https://anthonyspark.com/estate-planning-for-bitcoin/
Related cases involving multisig quorum failure
The holder wanted to migrate the funds to a new wallet but required 2-of-3 signatures
Hardware wallet (single key) · 2025 Survives
Hidden wallet discovered — institutional custody (2025)
Institutional custody · 2025 Constrained
The third device had been destroyed in a vehicle fire months before the holder's death.
Hardware wallet (single key) · 2025 Constrained
77 cases involve multisig quorum failure 274 cases involve hardware wallet (single key) View archive statistics →
This archive documents observed custody survivability failures. It does not attempt to document all Bitcoin losses or security incidents. Submit a case
← All cases
Framework references
Where Bitcoin Custody Intersects Legal and Fiduciary Authority
Where custody creates gaps in estate planning, fiduciary duty, and professional responsibility.
Professional Scope Boundary Matrix
What each professional or product covers, what they do not, and where gaps form between them.
The Independent Assessment Layer in Bitcoin Custody
How independent diagnostic layers emerge when multiple parties depend on shared infrastructure.
Terms guide
Outcome terms
Survives
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Constrained
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Blocked
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Indeterminate
There was not enough information to determine the outcome.
Structural terms
Single-person knowledge
Recovery depended on information or capability held by one individual who was unavailable.
Institutional dependence
Recovery depended on a third-party institution or service that was inaccessible or uncooperative.
Documentation gap
Recovery depended on instructions that were missing, incomplete, or unclear.
Authority mismatch
The person with legal authority to act did not have operational access, or vice versa.
Original text
Rate this translation
Your feedback will be used to help improve Google Translate