Our Results

Claimant, who we represented, claimed unsuitable and over-concentrated positions in, among others, Barclays Bank IPath S&P 500 Vix Short-Term Futures ETNs, Proshares Trust PSHS Short S&P 500 ETFs, as well as in an Oppenheimer sponsored fund, Global Chartist Fund.

Oppenheimer denied the allegations. The Panel awarded our client $800,000.00.

Read More

We represented the registered representative in this expungement proceeding. The Arbitrator granted expungement of a customer claim against our client even though the underlying arbitration was settled. The Arbitrator found after a fact-finding hearing that the claim against him was false, notwithstanding the settlement.

Read More

Summary: Claimants asserted the following causes of action: breach of fiduciary duty, unauthorized trading, negligence, breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, failure to supervise, negligent supervision, negligent hiring, and violation of FINRA rules. Claimants allege the actions related to various stocks and options.

Relief requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimants requested compensatory damages in the amount of $150,000.00, punitive damages, interest, costs, attorneys’ fees, and such other damages the Panel deems appropriate.

Result: Attorney Martin Unger of Wexler Burkhart Hirschberg & Unger, LLP successfully defends respondent and broker/dealer Network 1 Financial Securities Inc. in suitability case. Claimants damages, fees, and awards denied in entirety.

Summary: Claimants alleged churning, unsuitability, unauthorized trading, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, failure to supervise, breach of contract, and misrepresentation.

Relief requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimant requested sum total of $138,677.90 in damages from all named respondents.

Result: Attorney Martin Unger of Wexler Burkhart Hirschberg & Unger, LLP successfully defends all respondents in arbitration. Claimant’s claims, each and all, are denied.

In original Statement of Claim, Claimants asserted the following causes of action: failure to supervise; negligence; fraudulent misrepresentation and omissions; fraud; violation of federal and Connecticut state securities laws and FINRA rules; unsuitability; sale of unregistered investments; negligent or intentional misstatements in U5 filings; failure to warn clients; failure to warn regulators; respondeat superior; overconcentration; and “control person” liability. The causes of action relate to various securities.

In original Statement of Claim, Claimants requested compensatory damages in amount of $1,400,000.00; interest at the statutory rate; punitive damages; attorney’s fees; expert fees; forum fees; and such other and further relief as this Panel deems just and proper.

After considering the pleadings, the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, the Panel has decided in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination as follows:

1. Claimant Masi’s claims against Tradition and Longship are denied in their entirety.
2. Claimant’s claims against Sheridan are dismissed pursuant to Rule 12504 of the Code of Arbitration Procedure.
3. Any and all claims for relief not specifically addressed herein, including punitive damages and attorney’s fees, are denied.

Full award report for Case #16-00652

Claimant asserted the following cause of action: failure to repay loan.

In the Statement of Claim, Claimant requested compensatory damages in the amount of $7,500.00 and costs in the amount of $325.00.

Result: The undersigned Arbitrator has decided and determined in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination as follows: 1) Claimant's claims are denied in their entirety. 2) all other relief requests are denied. 3) FINRA Office of Dispute Resolution shall retain the $325.00 filing fee that the Claimant deposited previously. 4) Respondent is liable for and shall pay to Claimant $162.50 to reimburse Claimant for one half the filing fee previously paid to FINRA Office of Dispute Resolution.

Case Number: 17-00762

Claimant asserted the following causes of action: churning, suitability, unauthorized
trading, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, misrepresentation, lost
opportunity damages, failure to supervise, and disgorgement. In the Amended
Statement of Claim, the Claimant added the following cause of action: failure to
supervise. The causes of action relate to various securities.
Unless specifically admitted in his Statement of Answer and Amended Statement of
Answer, Respondent Melito denied the allegations made in the Statement of Claim and
Amended Statement of Claim, and asserted various affirmative defenses.
Unless specifically admitted in his Statement of Answer, Respondent Sharma denied the
allegations made in the Amended Statement of Claim and asserted various affirmative
defenses.
Unless specifically admitted in his Statement of Answer, Respondent Dina denied the
allegations made in the Amended Statement of Claim and asserted various affirmative
defenses.

Award:

After considering the pleadings, the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing,
and the post-hearing submissions, the Panel has decided in full and final resolution of
the issues submitted for determination as follows:
1. Claimant’s claims against Respondents Melito and Lavenziano are denied in
their entirety.
2. Claimant’s claims against Respondent Sharma are dismissed in their entirety.
3. Respondent Melito’s request for expungement of his CRD records is denied.
4. Respondent Sharma’s request for expungement of his CRD records is
denied.
5. Any and all claims for relief not specifically addressed herein, including attorneys’
fees and punitive damages, are denied.

Case Number: 16-00095

Claimant asserted the following causes of action: unsuitability and unauthorized transactions, failure to supervise, and breach of fiduciary duty.
The causes of action related to Claimant’s allegations that Respondents over concentrated Claimant’s accounts in unsuitable investments, such as GT Advanced Technologies, QiHoo 360 Technology, and Vasco Data Security International Inc.
In the Statement of Answer, Respondents requested that all claims be denied, costs be assessed against Claimant, attorneys’ fees, and other relief as determined by the Arbitrator.

Result:The undersigned arbitrator has decided and determined in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination as follows:

1) Claimant’s claims are denied in their entirety.

2) The expungement requests of Slipek, Murino, and Eisenberg are denied.

W&B successfully defends a broker-dealer client in breach of fiduciary duty case.

Case Number 13-03747

W&B successfully defends broker-dealer client ad registered representative in suitability case.

Case Number 14-02904

Summary: Claimant asserted the following causes of action: breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and indemnification.

Relief Requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimant requested:

• Compensatory Damages: $16,350.00
• Interest: Legal Rate of 9% per annum
• Attorneys' Fees: Unspecified
• Costs: Unspecified
• Other: Unspecified

Case Number: 13-03098

Summary: Claimants asserted the following causes of action: breach of contract and unjust enrichment.

• Unless specifically admitted in his Answer, Respondent denied the allegations made in the Statement of Claim and asserted various affirmative defenses.

Relief Requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimants requested compensatory damages in the amount of $43,312.50 plus interest at the rate of 9% per annum from April 8, 2010, attorneys' fees, and costs.

• Respondent requested that Claimants' claim be dismissed with prejudice, that Claimants be assessed all forum fees, and for such other and further relief the Arbitrator deems just and proper.

Case Number: 12-00341

Summary: Claimants asserted the following cause of action: failure to reimburse for the 2010 state registration fees. Unless specifically admitted in its Answer, Respondent denied the allegations made in the Statement of Claim and asserted various affirmative defenses.

Relief Requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimants requested compensatory damages in the amount of $5,687.00.

Case Number: 10-03660

Summary: Claimant asserted the following causes of action: defamatory statements and defamation per se.

Relief Requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimant requested expungement of his form U5 and reimbursement of filing fees.

Case Number: 14-01067

Summary: Claimant asserted the following cause of action: improper and erroneous filing of customer complaint with CRD.

Relief Requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimant requested:

• Compensatory Damages: $500.00
• Attorneys' Fees: Unspecified
• Costs: Unspecified
• Other: Unspecified
• Expungement: From CRD record

Case Number: 11-02066

Summary: Claimant asserted the following causes of action: defamation, tortious interference with a business relationship, negligent entrustment, and failure to supervise.

Relief Requested: In the Statement of Claim. Claimant requested injunctive relief, compensatory damages of approximately $500,000.00 plus interest, punitive damages and attomeys' fees.

Case Number: 12-01451

Claimants asserted the following causes of action: breach of fiduciary duty-suitability; fraudulent misrepresentation; negligent misrepresentation; negligence; unjust enrichment; and breach of contract. The causes of action relate to Claimants’ investment in unspecified common stock and exchange traded funds, and to options trading in Claimants’ account.

Unless specifically admitted in the Statement of Answer, Respondent denied the allegations made in the Statement of Claim and asserted various affirmative defenses.

Result: After considering the pleadings and all submissions regarding Respondent’s motion to dismiss, the Panel has decided in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination as follows:

Respondent’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12206 of the Code is granted by the Panel without prejudice to any right the Claimants have to file in court; the Claimants are not prohibited from pursuing their claims in a court pursuant to Rule 12206(b) of the Code.

Case Number: 15-03227

Claimant asserted the following causes of action: unsuitability, failure to supervise, fraud, and misrepresentation.

The causes of action relate to Claimant's investments in call option in Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Yelp, and Green Mountain Coffee, put options in Tesla and Netflix, and stock in Organovo Holdings, Inc.

Result: The undersigned Arbitrator has decided and determined in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination as follows:

• Claimant's claims are denied in their entirety.
• All other relief requests are denied.
• The Office of Dispute Resolution shall retain the $600.00 filing fee that Claimant deposited previously.
• Respondents are jointly and severally liable for and shall pay to Claimant $300.00 to reimburse Claimant for one-half of the filing fee previously paid to the Office of Dispute Resolution.

Case Number: 15-03158

Claimant asserted that false and/or clearly erroneous information appears on his Central Registration Depository ("CRD") records. The cause of action relates to an online complaint filed on October 31, 2011, ("Online Complaint") against Claimant by Respondent Dobarganes as an officer/director of Respondent IMC regarding promissory notes.

Relief Requested: In the Statement of Claim, Claimant requested expungement of all references to the Online Complaint from his CRD records, costs and such other relief deemed just and proper by the Panel.

Case Number: 14-00320

Claimant asserted the following causes of action: unsuitability, misrepresentation, failure to disclose material facts, and violation of fiduciary obligations. The causes of action relate to Claimant’s investments in John Hancock Fds II Floating Rate Income Fund Class B (security symbol “JFIBX”), and Mainstay Fds Tr Floating Rate Fund Class B (security symbol “MXFBX”).

Case Number: 14-02184