Who Controls Ondo 2 — Source: CoinGape Nathan Allman’s death triggered a leadership and ownership dispute at Ondo Finance. Kathleen Allman’s estate rights became central to the battle over On
The death of Nathan Allman did not simply leave Ondo Finance without its founder. It exposed a governance problem at one of crypto’s biggest tokenization companies.
Allman, who died unexpectedly in May 2026 at 32, was not just Ondo’s CEO. He was also its sole director and controlling shareholder. The company had a two-seat board, but the second seat was vacant. His death therefore created an unusual corporate vacuum in the company. Ondo was left without a sitting director at the same time that the voting power attached to Allman’s shares moved into his estate.
That gap is now at the center of a Delaware corporate-control battle involving Ondo’s acting CEO Ian De Bode, Allman’s mother Kathleen Allman, other members of the Allman family and an early Ondo investor.
The fight is not simply over who gets the CEO title. It is raising multiple questions. This includes who could legally appoint directors, who could exercise Allman’s voting rights. It also includes whether actions taken during the succession period were valid and whether a proposed multimillion-dollar compensation package could stand.
Here’s how:
The starting point of the dispute is Allman’s unusual concentration of power.
According to the litigation, he was Ondo’s CEO, sole director and controlling shareholder when he died. Because the company’s second board seat was vacant, there was no sitting director left to convene a board meeting or formally appoint a successor.
The SEC’s own records also provide a window into Allman’s position inside the wider Ondo structure. An SEC Form ADV identifies Nathan Allman as a shareholder and control person of Ondo Finance.
His death therefore created two separate problems at once. There was a management vacancy. And there was a shareholder-control problem.
The second issue became particularly important because Allman did not leave a will, according to the subsequent estate litigation.
Right into few hours, Ian De Bode stepped in as President after Ondo finance founder’s death. Ian De Bode had already been running important parts of Ondo’s business as president.
According to Kathleen Allman’s Delaware complaint, De Bode argued that Ondo’s bylaws allowed him to automatically become CEO. The estate disputes that interpretation, arguing that the CEO vacancy had to be filled through board action. That is a difficult proposition when, according to the complaint, there was no sitting board at the time.
Nathan Allman being the sole shareholder | Source: SEC Advisor Filings
The dispute then moved beyond the CEO title.
The estate alleges that De Bode used a voting agreement to install himself as Ondo’s sole director. He subsequently took corporate actions including hiring advisers, approving performance grants and attempting to add another director.
That makes the voting agreement one of the most important pieces of the entire case.
The question is not simply whether De Bode became CEO.
It is whether the contractual arrangements surrounding Ondo’s shareholders gave him a route to establish corporate control while Allman’s shares were still tied up in probate.
On June 26, a Hawaii probate court appointed Nathan’s mother, Kathleen Allman, as personal representative of his estate, according to the Delaware litigation.
That was important because the estate included Nathan’s ownership interest and the voting rights attached to it.
Kathleen, represented by Attorney Callan R. Jackson, therefore became the person administering those interests on behalf of the estate.
The two sides then developed competing views of what had happened after Nathan’s death. De Bode’s position was that the company needed operational continuity and that he had authority to continue running it.
Kathleen’s later complaint argued that De Bode had assumed powers that required board approval.
The dispute further escalated on July 24.
Kathleen used the estate’s shareholder voting rights to execute a written consent and reconstitute Ondo’s board, according to the complaint.
She initially appointed herself as a director and later expanded the board, including appointing Nathan’s sister, Tahnee Towill. Gordon Liao was also proposed for a seat but declined.
The newly constituted board then voted to remove De Bode from his positions and appointed Kathleen as chair, CEO, secretary and treasurer.
De Bode disputed the allegations and said they were meritless.
Kathleen’s legal challenge was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery on July 24.
The official Delaware docket lists the case as Kathleen C. Allman v. Ondo Finance Inc., Case No. 2026-0978, before Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick.
At the heart of the case is a basic corporate question. Who had the legal authority to control Ondo after Nathan Allman’s death?
The dispute also covers actions taken by De Bode during the period between Nathan’s death and Kathleen’s intervention, including corporate and compensation decisions.
Kathleen’s complaint further alleges that De Bode received or was offered a substantial compensation package. This includes a $900,000 annual salary and bonus, a $1 million signing bonus, 26 million restricted token units and roughly 846,000 shares.
Those figures are allegations in the complaint, not findings by the court.
Timeline of Ondo Delaware Case | Source: CoinGape
As per the latest updates on September 16, the corporate battle has now spilled into a separate Hawaii proceeding.
Nathan’s half-sister, Dr. Lani Clinton, and Ondo investor David Chen petitioned a Hawaii court for a limited conservatorship involving Kathleen’s interests in Nathan’s estate, according to the September filings.
The petition makes allegations concerning Kathleen’s alcohol use, cognitive abilities, spending and financial judgment.
Those claims remain allegations and have not been established by a court. Kathleen has disputed them arguing they are Ian’s tactics.
This creates a second legal question alongside the Delaware corporate dispute: who should have authority to manage the estate and the interests Nathan left behind?
The battle would be significant for any company, but Ondo Finance is no longer a small crypto startup.
In a September 2026 submission to the SEC, Ondo said it had approximately $4 billion in tokenized assets, more than 430 tokenized stocks and ETFs. It has over $1 billion in TVL and more than $20 billion in cumulative trading volume on Ondo Global Markets. Recently, Ondo became the first tokenization company to join DTCC’s Fund/SERV network.
Its broader business also includes regulated entities and the infrastructure acquired through its recent Oasis Pro transaction.
So the succession fight is ultimately about more than who gets the CEO title.
It is about who controls the company Nathan Allman built and who has the legal authority to decide where it goes next.
Who Controls Ondo? Inside the Mega Succession War Shaking Crypto’s RWA Giant originally appeared on CoinGape
