Awards & Settlements

David Ball and Misako Ball vs. Sunset Financial Group

Recovered losses for two retirees concentrated in alternative investments. The Panel agreed that the investments were unsuitable for the clients and awarded them their losses on these products. Oakes and Fosher argued that the clients should also receive an award of the contingency legal fees that they were going to pay on the award. The Panel agreed and also awarded attorneys fees and costs.

Frank Lee vs. First Kentucky Securities

Recovered full losses for retiree concentrated in two oil and gas MLPs. These MLPs, Breitburn Energy and Linn Energy made up close to 50% of Mr. Lee’s account. First Kentucky had Mr. Lee sign a letter that he was purchasing more of these stocks against the advice of his broker, however, Oakes & Fosher argued that this was an attempt for First Kentucky to shield itself from liability while really still recommending the stocks. Notably, the Panel awarded the client all his losses on Breitburn and Linn, even those purchases made referenced in the letter. The Panel also awarded the client 1/3 of his compensatory damages back as attorneys fees.

Alford v. National Planning Corporation

Award of $2,629,273 in favor of investor Sandra C. Alford. The case involved a stockbroker at National Planning Corporation who seriously mishandled the account of an elderly widow and abused the trust she had given to the broker. The Panel's award resulted in the client recovering all of her losses, plus the money she would have made had the account been handled properly, and $1,000,000 in punitive damages, and covering her attorneys’ fees as well.

Burch v. Huntleigh Securities Corporation

Award of $750,000 in favor of investor Cynthia A. Burch against Huntleigh Securities Corporation, following a successful claim of breach of fiduciary duty, common law fraud, negligence , and misrepresentation. The award included compensatory and punitive damages as well as attorney fees.

Gillespie v. Oppenheimer et al

Unanimous Award of $1,341,280 in favor of a Texas investor against Oppenheimer & Co. The case involved "churning", which is the excessive trading of a client's account for the sole purpose of generating commissions for the broker. The Panel's award also included recovery of interest as well as attorneys’ fees.

Turbo Investors, LLC v. Robert M. Jaffe

In one of the only successful cases against associates of Bernard Madoff, the FINRA Panel made a unanimous Award of $1,105,000 against a FINRA licensed broker, Robert Jaffe, an associate of Bernard Madoff who recommended that the investors entrust their funds in the Madoff fund, a Ponzi scheme . After the case, FINRA barred Mr. Jaffe from any association with any FINRA members.

Biren et al. v. Banc of America Investment Services, Inc.

Unanimous Award of $1,090,664 in favor of Boston investors against Banc of America Investment Services for misrepresentations and losses relating to the brokerage firm’s sale of variable annuities .

Peterson et al. v. Royal Alliance Associates, Inc.

Unanimous Award of $1,403,500 for a group of three California retired AT&T employees who were defrauded by Royal Alliance Associates and its broker by encouraging them to accept a lump sum retirement package, and then investing the retirement funds in self-serving speculative real estate investment trusts and unsuitable variable annuities. The Panel's award in this matter was much more than the net out of pocket losses and was based on a formula to make the clients whole for the diminution in the value of their accounts. The Panel's award also included additional recovery in the form of interest and punitive damages. Royal Alliance appealed the Panel's decision all the way to the California Court of Appeal, which confirmed the Panel's decision.

Artmire v. First Midwest Securities, Inc.

Unanimous Award of $853,338 in favor of a brokerage firm customer whose account had been excessively traded to generate commissions. The Arbitration Panel awarded compensatory damages, punitive damages of double the compensatory damages, plus interest and attorneys’ fees.

Rooney v. Wachovia Securities LLC, Bruce E. Wiegand and Morton S. Rudin

Unanimous Award of $566,832 in favor of a couple due to broker fraud relating to mutual fund switching and improper mutual fund share classes, all designed to generate greater commissions and fees for the broker, knowing that his conduct was detrimental to his customers. Award included punitive damages in the amount of twice the compensatory damages. The Arbitration Panel also held the branch manager as jointly responsible for failure to supervise the broker.

Nelson et al. v. Royal Alliance Associates, Inc.

Unanimous Award of $597,294 for a small group of retirees whose broker made unsuitable and self-serving recommendations regarding variable annuities and non-traded real estate investment trusts.

LaBolle v. Oppenheimer & Co.

Unanimous Award for customer whose account had been excessively traded. Even though the account was profitable, the Panel awarded $235,000 in damages based on the difference between 1) what the customer should have had if the account was handled properly and 2) how the account actually fared. The Panel also awarded the investor attorneys’ fees and costs.

Osterman v. Morgan Stanley DW, Inc.

Unanimous Award of $309,865 for an Arizona retiree whose brokerage account was excessively traded on margin. The award included disgorgement of commissions as well as attorneys’ fees.

White v. ItradeDirect.com Corporation

Unanimous Award of $529,467 for a Utah couple, which included interest, costs, attorneys’ fees and interest, against a brokerage firm which engaged in deceptive and fraudulent conduct in its handling of customer funds.

Keiffer v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc.

Unanimous Award of $215,182 for a Virginia investor for losses incurred due to the broker’s failure to follow customers’ directives about investment objectives.

Monahan et al. v. H. Beck, Inc.

Unanimous Award for $400,000 for Michigan investors for losses incurred due to the failure of the brokerage firm to supervise its broker.

Bien et al. v. Mid-Atlantic Capital Corporation

Unanimous Award for retired Colorado couple in the amount of $1,042,884 who were sold private, non-traded real estate investment trusts. Award included market-adjusted damages, prejudgment interest, attorneys’ fees and costs.

Lewis v. Wells Fargo Advisors

Unanimous Award for $354,582 against a major brokerage firm for unsuitable investments and excessive trading to generate commissions and fees.

Umstead v. Nations Financial Group, Inc.

Unanimous Award for $290,279 for a Pennsylvania retired couple whose brokerage account was invested unsuitably and which was excessively traded.

Estate of Lawrence D. Burns

Unanimous Award for $280,683 for an elderly customer who was invested in a fraudulent security. The award was against the brokerage firm for failure to supervise.

McDonald v. Stifel, Nicolaus & Co.

Unanimous Award for $375,711 for customers of Stifel Nicolaus whose broker invested the brokerage accounts in speculative securities and leveraged the accounts on margin. The award included additional relief in the form of attorneys’ fees and punitive damages.

Crutcher v. New England Securities, Inc.,

Unanimous Award for $539,000 for an Illinois investor whose broker stole customer funds through the guise of bogus promissory notes. he award included additional compensation in the form of interest, costs, attorneys’ fees and punitive damages.

Goodman v. Meyers Associates, Inc.

Unanimous Award of $521,615 for a Tennessee investor whose account was churned by the broker, and the brokerage firm failed to supervise properly. The award included attorneys’ fees, interest, costs and punitive damages.

Estate of Malcolm Schvey v. Janney Montgomery Scott, LLC

Unanimous Award of $427,060 for an estate where an elderly individual had been the subject of financial abuse by his broker. The broker excessively traded securities for the sole purpose of generating commissions, all of which was at the expense of his elderly customer.

Settlement of $390,000 for an investor whose brokerage account was excessively traded.

Settlement of $312,149 for losses incurred because the broker recommended a large variable annuity to a retired investor for the purposes of generating large fees.

Settlement of $650,000 for a retired widow whose broker encouraged her to borrow money to invest in speculative investments.

Settlement of $449,000 for losses incurred due to excessively trading long term products such as mutual funds, closed end funds and unit investment trusts.

Settlement of $550,000 against a major brokerage firm for speculative investments for a retiree.

Settlement of $725,000 due to a broker abusing the brokerage account of a disabled child who had received settlement funds due to an injury the child sustained as an infant.

Settlement of $550,000 for an investor who lost funds due to the broker’s failure to invest the customer’s funds in an appropriate and suitable manner.

Settlement of $700,000 for a New York customer who lost significant funds due to his broker’s speculative and unsuitable option trading strategy.

Settlement of $537,500 for a Missouri elderly retiree whose brokerage account was mishandled and abused by a broker from a major, national brokerage firm.

Settlement of $600,000 in favor of an investor whose broker caused him to lose most of his retirement funds by investing in speculative options.

Settlement of $700,000 for group of investors whose broker misrepresented the risk of various highly speculative real estate ventures which he recommended to his customers.

Settlement for $395,000 for a brokerage customer whose account was excessively traded by his stock broker.

Settlement on behalf of Madison County, Illinois against the brokerage firm Sterne, Agee & Leach for $340,000. The case involved the brokerage firm charging the County Treasurer’s Office excessive commissions relating to bond purchases.

Settlement of $960,000 for a group of Ohio retirees who were invested in high-risk securities which were unsuitable for them given their retirement status and need for conservative income.

Settlement of $795,000 for a Georgia investor against a major brokerage firm for improper conduct relating to trading in and out of mutual funds and other packaged investment products.

Settlement of $1,470,000 for an investor whose brokerage account was seriously mishandled and abused through speculative private placements, unsuitable securities as well as self-serving trading of the customer’s account to generate excessive commissions and fees.

Settlement of $1,087,500 against a large brokerage firm for mismanaging a retired couple’s retirement savings.

Settlement of $1,030,000 for an investor whose brokerage account was invested in an unsuitably aggressive manner which was inconsistent with his need and desire for conservative investments which produced income.

Settlement for $375,000 for a disabled individual whose account was mismanaged.

Jill Jester v Dinosaur Financial Group

Oakes & Fosher recovered all of the losses suffered by a widow. The Dinosaur Financial Group broker put Mrs. Jester's huband's retirement accounts in alternative investments. The Jester's had limited assets and could not afford to lose this retirement money. The net losses suffered by the Jesters were $111,000. The Panel awarded Ms. Jester almost 4 times this amount, which included punitive damages of over $100,000.