Over the last 12 years, Oakes & Fosher has tried and won more FINRA arbitration cases on behalf of individual investors than any other law firm in the country.

*Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based alone on prior results.

AdobeStock 65075816

The law firm of Oakes & Fosher is presently investigating the possible misconduct of securities broker John Galinsky. According to his publicly available FINRA BrokerCheck report, John Galinsky has been the subject of multiple customer disputes throughout his career.

John Galinsky is an Illinois based securities broker. He has worked in the securities industry for thirty-two years. During his career, he has been registered with ten different securities firms.

His Registrations

  • Blinder, Robinson & Co. (1986-1988)
  • Bear, Stearns & Co. (1988-1989)
  • Shearson Lehman Hutton (1989-1990)
  • Oppenheimer & Co. (1990-1993)
  • Rothschild Investment Corporation (1993-1996)
  • David A. Noyes & Company (1996-1999)
  • Advanced Equities (1999-2009)
  • Fintegra, LLC (2010-2011)
  • National Securities Corporation (2012-2017)
  • First Dominion Capital (2017-Present)

The Allegations

  • In March 1992, a customer alleged that a $46,000 loss in their account was caused by fraud and an unsuitable recommendation to invest in short vista chemical. This case went to arbitration and the claimant was awarded $25,000.
  • In August 1995, a customer alleged that John Galinsky used funds from the customer’s account to purchase stock without their authorization. This case was settled for $10,000.
  • In November 1999, John Galinsky’s member firm at the time, David A. Noyes & Company was contacted by customers regarding some of their off shore investments. These specific investments were not found anywhere in the firm’s records. Due to his actions in this matter, Galinsky was permitted to resign from David A. Noyes & Company.
  • In July 2000, customers alleged that John Galinsky misappropriated their funds, executed unauthorized trades, and engaged in unauthorized margin trading. This case was settled for an undisclosed amount in damages.
  • In July 2013, a customer alleged that John Galinsky recommended unsuitable securities, made material misrepresentations and omissions, and breached his fiduciary duty. This case went to arbitration where the customer was awarded approximately $1.2 million in damages.
  • In September 2015, John Galinsky was sanctioned by FINRA for allegedly failing to to comply with an arbitration award or settlement agreement. Due to his alleged actions he was suspended by FINRA from acting as a securities broker in any fashion for about three and half months.
  • In April 2018, John Galinsky was once again sanctioned by FINRA. The findings in this matter state that Galinsky sent emails to both prospective and current investors that were not fair and balanced. They also did not provide a sound basis for evaluating the facts regarding a company involved in a private securities offering or the offering itself. The findings went on to state that, on two separate occasions, Galinsky forwarded an email to a customer about a specific security; however, the emails left out the fact that a recent patent infringement lawsuit had recently been filed against the company in which Galinksy wanted to invest. His email was thus misleading because he only forward part of the email to the customers. For his actions in this matter, John Galinsky was fined $7,500. He was also suspended by FINRA from acting as a securities broker in any fashion for a period of ten business days.


Sometimes, when securities brokers want their customers to purchase a security that they don’t think they will agree to, they mislead their customer into thinking it is something its not. This is accomplished through one of two methods. One is misrepresentation. This is where a broker provides their customer with false information. The second is through omission. This is where the securities broker leaves out pertinent information when pitching the investment to their customer. Securities brokers sometimes believe they can get away with omission as it can often appear accidental. Whether or not a securities broker omitted material facts on purpose or through their own negligence, they have still violated their fiduciary duty. The reason omission is such a serious charge is because it can cause investors to purchase unsuitable investments that they would not have otherwise purchased.

Oakes & Fosher Can Help

Many investors are unaware of the legal recourse available to them after losing money due to securities broker fraud and/or negligence. The truth is that investors who have lost money in this fashion may actually be entitled to damages. Oakes & Fosher dedicates its entire legal practice to helping investors across the nation. If you or someone you know have lost money investing with John Galinsky, please contact Oakes & Fosher for a free and private consultation. We work on a contingency basis, which means there are no fees charged unless we collect for you.