Recent history shows that FINRA is going after brokers who alter client’s records.  This, unfortunately, reminded me of my own bad experience as a young lawyer when defending a broker.

That broker had great “contemporaneous” notes of his communications with the client that made the case very defendable.  My opponent questioned the authenticity of these

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a dismissal of investors’ securities claims in the wake of a bank liquidation, but left the door open to a possible “silent fraud” claim under Michigan law.  See Dailey v. Medlock,

A claim for silent fraud under Michigan law requires a plaintiff

I recently blogged about the pervasive nature of data breaches and the particular risks presented to this industry.  Many firms may think that they are secure because they used a vendor to build a secure environment, but history tells us that is not the case. 

Cyber-attacks do not always come from a direct hit, but

A divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of securities law antifraud claims against a “trusted” investor in the pump-and-dump scheme perpetrated by two defunct broker-dealers, A.R. Baron & Co. and Bear Stearns Cos. Inc.  See Fezzani v. Bear Stearns & Co. Inc., 2d Cir. No. 09-4414-cv, 5/7/13,

The United States District Court for the District of Delaware denied a plaintiff’s attempt at a private remedy action for a violation of Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rule 10b-17.  See Gold v. Ford Motor Company, Civil Action No. 10-587-LPS (D.Del.2013).

No court has recognized such a private right of action under Rule 10b-17. 

Former shareholders may pursue narrowed claims against some large private equity firms who allegedly conspired with one another minimizing competition for target companies.  See Dahl v. Bain Capital Partners LLC, D. Mass., 07-12388, 3/13/13),

The plaintiffs previously held shares in various public companies that were, ultimately, acquired by private equity firms.  The complaint

An allegedly defrauded investor may not compel a broker-dealer to arbitrate claims over his allegedly unsuitable investments.  See Berthel Fisher & Co. Financial Services Inc. v. Frandino, D. Ariz., No. DV-12-02165-PHX-NVW, 5/14/13.  The investor was not a “customer” of the firm’s registered representative for purposes of the FINRA arbitration code since the registered representative