Our Securities Arbitration and Litigation attorneys provide practical, strategic, and efficient solutions to clients in litigation, arbitration, and regulatory and enforcement proceedings in Texas and throughout the nation. Our attorneys have taken hundreds of arbitrations and dozens of trials to a final hearing on the merits in matters ranging into the tens of millions of dollars.

Attorneys in our Securities Arbitration practice group have decades of experience representing retail brokerage firms, their officers, directors, managers, and registered representatives (whether employees or independent contractors). We have represented clients of all sizes – from small firms with a handful of licensed professionals, investment bankers, and Registered Investment Advisors to some of the largest brokerage firms in the world. We also have extensive experience representing clearing firms in disputes with customers, correspondents, and other clearing firms. As a result, our attorneys understand the business from the inside out. Our deep familiarity and experience with both the types of disputes that typically arise and the unique challenges our clients face enables us to serve as problem-solvers and partners to our clients.

One of the principal strengths we bring is our knowledge of the securities business. We have experience with compliance, sales, operations, cashiering, margin, and the regulatory framework in which broker-dealers function. There is no learning curve when we take on a case, and as such, we can identify the legal issues involved quickly, without extensive briefing on the business background. We have extensive experience analyzing and explaining to judges, juries, and arbitration panels cases involving equities, partnerships, mortgage-backed securities, options, annuities, ETFs, mutual funds, municipal bonds, commodities, and futures. We have taken cases to final hearing involving margin requirements, suitability, unauthorized trading, failure to disclose, breaches of ordinary and fiduciary duties, selling away, and penny stocks, among others.

We also regularly handle broker-dealer recruiting and raiding litigation and employment cases involving claims of wrongful termination, harassment and discrimination, claims on employee forgivable loans, defamation, and theft of trade secrets.

We have also successfully compelled the arbitration of matters erroneously brought in court both in proceedings at the trial court and appellate levels.

Our lawyers have represented clients in arbitration before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), the American Arbitration Association (AAA), and before other arbitration panels.

Our lawyers have also represented broker-dealers and individuals in regulatory investigations and enforcement actions before the Securities Exchange Commission, FINRA and the Texas State Securities Board.

We have always remained sensitive to the ongoing cost pressures which broker-dealers face when handling disputes involving outside counsel. We regularly provide clients with realistic budgets, and we adhere to them. Additionally, because of the large number of arbitrations that we have handled in Texas and the surrounding states, we know the arbitrators and maintain a database of arbitrators.

We know, and have tried cases against, the lawyers around the country who regularly bring cases against securities firms. We have a reputation as well-prepared, knowledgeable attorneys who will take a case to trial. In settlement discussions, our reputation for trying cases removes leverage that claimants might otherwise have.

With the myriad issues facing the broker-dealer industry today, and the increasingly complex environment of regulatory issues and litigation, our comprehensive experience, national presence and client focus enables us to provide the highest quality of legal and advisory services to our valued clients.

Appellate cases
In re Wachovia Securities, LLC, 312 S.W.3d 243 (Tex. App. – Dallas 2010, no pet.) Convinced court of appeals to overrule trial court’s denial of motion to compel arbitration on behalf of securities firm facing lawsuit alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation and order claims to FINRA arbitration, which we subsequently successfully defended to a take-nothing judgment.
In re Prudential Securities Incorporated and Linda Metzinger Lamonte, 159 S.W.3d 279 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, original proceeding) Represented retail brokerage firm and registered representative. Houston Court of Appeals held trial court failed to compel arbitration of claims of plaintiff as well as those assigned to her by her former husband, who signed an arbitration agreement with brokerage firm, because the claims were factually intertwined.
Arbitration
Customer Complaints
Represented brokerage firms and broker in claims involving physical stock certificates that were allegedly not returned. Claimant sought damages in excess of $500,000 in damages. After three-day hearing, a nominal award (less than $5,000) was entered, and the panel recommended the expungement of the financial advisor’s registration records held with the Central Registration Depository (“CRD”).
Represented brokerage firm in case involving technology stocks. Claimant asserted claims of breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, failure to supervise, violation of NASD rules and Oklahoma Securities statutes. Claims were denied in their entirety after a two-day hearing.
Claimant alleged that her financial advisor recommended unsuitable closed-end funds that caused losses of approximately $400,000. After a three-day hearing, the panel dismissed all claims against firm and financial advisor.
Represented broker in claim against him and his former firm alleging substantial damages caused by alleged fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and unstable trading. After an arbitration of the claims in Houston, the panel issued a take-nothing award and ruled that the claim be expunged from the broker’s record.
Represented brokerage firm in arbitration where claimants sought $19 million in damages and alleged fraud and failure to supervise in connection with the sale of low-priced securities. Obtained dismissal of claims in their entirety after a full hearing in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Represented brokerage firm in case where claimant alleged over $3 million in damages related to alleged diversion of community property to pay for losses in futures account. Pre-hearing motion to dismiss granted in arbitration pending in Houston.
Represented broker and firm in arbitration involving municipal bonds. Claimant alleged trading on margin without authority, unsuitable trading, fraud, constructive trust, and failure to supervise. Claimant asserted damages of $800,000. Nominal award after four-day hearing in Oklahoma City.
Represented brokerage firm and registered representative in Houston arbitration involving options trading. Claimants sought $900,000 in damages. Obtained dismissal of all claims except suitability at the end of claimants’ case. Upon conclusion of the hearing, panel dismissed suitability claims and ordered claims expunged from the registered representative’s CRD record.
Represented brokerage firm and registered representative in arbitration in Houston wherein claimant alleged unsuitable trade, misrepresentations, failure to supervise and violation of Texas laws in connection with the sale of municipal bonds. The case settled during the cross examination of claimant. The panel ordered expungement of the financial advisor’s CRD record.
Claimant was a retiree who claimed that his financial advisor recommended an unsuitable growth portfolio that caused $390,000 in damages. After a three-day hearing, the panel dismissed all claims.
Successfully represented retail brokerage firm in claim brought by investor alleging negligence, gross negligence, breach of contract, misrepresentation, violation of Texas and federal securities acts, and fraud. Investor alleged retail brokerage firm failed to properly allocate assets. After four-day arbitration hearing, claims were dismissed in their entirety and records of registered representatives involved were expunged.
Represented brokerage firm in a case of alleged negligence, gross negligence, fraud, and securities fraud. After hearing, the panel denied all claims and recommended expungement of registered representations. Houston FINRA arbitration.
Industry Disputes
FINRA Arbitration Oklahoma City (2012). Represented claimant brokerage firm in case against competitor brokerage firm for claims of raiding, unfair competition, tortious interference with prospective and existing business relations, and misappropriation of confidential information. The causes of action related to respondent’s raid of one of claimant’s retail brokerage offices by taking over half of the financial advisors of that office and half of that office’s production. After 48 hearing sessions over the course of 10 months, the panel issued an award for claimant.
FINRA Arbitration Dallas (2012). Represented claimant brokerage firm in case against competitor brokerage firm for claims of raiding, unfair competition, tortious interference with existing contractual and business relations, tortious interferences with prospective relations, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy, and tortious inducement to cause breach of fiduciary duty. The causes of action related to respondent’s raid of one of claimant’s retail brokerage offices by taking over one half of the financial advisors of that office and over 40 percent of the office’s production.
FINRA Arbitration Florida (2012). Represented claimant brokerage firm in case against competitor brokerage firm for claims of raiding, unfair competition, tortious interference with business relations, tortious interference with prospective relations, unjust enrichment, and civil conspiracy. The causes of action related to respondent’s raid of one of claimant’s retail brokerage offices by taking over one half of the financial advisors of that office and over 70 percent of the production of that office.
FINRA Arbitration California (2013). Represented respondent brokerage firm in malicious prosecution suit brought by former financial advisor.
FINRA Arbitration California (2013). Represented claimant brokerage firm in raiding case against competitor brokerage firm. Other causes of action included breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty of loyalty, inducing breach of contract, intentional interference with actual and prospective economic advantages, and unfair competition. The claims related to respondent’s raid of one of claimant’s retail brokerage offices by taking six of the office’s eight financial advisors, including the branch manager, and 90 percent of the business of the office.
FINRA Arbitration California (2013). Represented claimant brokerage firm in case against competitor brokerage firm for claims of raiding and unfair competition as well as breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; breach of duty of loyalty; inducing breach of contract, fiduciary duty, and duty of loyalty; and intentional interference with actual and prospective economic advantages. The claims arose from respondent’s raid of one of claimant’s retail brokerage offices by taking multiple employees, including the branch manager, and over half of the office’s production.
Former broker sued brokerage firm alleging negligent misrepresentation and fraud in his hiring and sought in excess of $2.5 million in damages. Initially sued in state court, but case was compelled to arbitration after an appeal. At arbitration, the panel rejected claimant’s claims in their entirety.
Represented brokerage firm and individual respondents in arbitration where claimant alleged raiding, unfair competition, and violation of trade secret statute as a result of recruitment and hiring of three registered representatives. Claimants sought a permanent injunction and damages in excess of $2 million. After six-day hearing in Oklahoma City, the claims were dismissed in their entirety.
Successfully represented claimant brokerage firm in case against competitor brokerage firm for claims of raiding, unfair competition, tortious interference with prospective and existing business relations, and misappropriation of confidential information. The causes of action related to respondent’s raid of one of claimant’s retail brokerage offices by taking over half of the financial advisors of that office and half of that office’s production. After 48 hearing sessions over the course of 10 months, the panel issued an award for claimant.
Represented claimant brokerage firm in case against competitor brokerage firm for claims of raiding, unfair competition, tortious interference with existing contractual and business relations, tortious interferences with prospective relations, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy, and tortious inducement to cause breach of fiduciary duty. The causes of action relate to respondent’s raid of one of claimant’s retail brokerage offices by taking over one half of the financial advisors of that office and over 40 percent of the office’s production. Case was successfully resolved.
Represented financial services firm in claim against former employee for breach of employment agreement and covenant not to compete and misappropriation of trade secrets. After a three-day arbitration, a permanent injunction was entered against the former employee and the financial services firm was awarded damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.
Clearing Firm Disputes
Obtained prehearing motion to dismiss for clearing firm. The panel issued a reasoned opinion explaining client’s limited role as a clearing firm.
Panel granted clearing firm’s motion to dismiss at the conclusion of claimant’s presentation of evidence.

— Attorney News

Jonathan Neerman to Lead Webinar on Securities Arbitration and Mediation

— Attorney News

Benchmark Litigation Names Retta Miller Among Top 250 Women in Litigation

— Attorney News

56 Jackson Walker Attorneys Named to 2018 'Texas Super Lawyers' List by Thomson Reuters