PaineWebber v. Bybyk
81 F. 3d 1193 or 64 USLW 2688, 60 A.L.R. 5 th 923 (2nd Cir.)
A brokerage firm brought an action against our client seeking to stay client’s arbitration alleging that the client’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations and therefore not arbitrable. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court decision holding (1) the issue of whether the investors claims against the brokerage firm were subject to arbitration was a question for the arbitrators not the Court, and (2) under New York law, investors claims against their brokerage firm for attorney’s fees was subject to arbitration, even though the Arbitration Agreement was governed by New York law under which attorney’s fees may not be submitted to arbitration unless expressly provided.
Porush v. Lemire
6. F. Supp.2d 178, (EDNY)
The Federal District Court confirmed an award of the arbitrators in favor of our client holding (1) that the arbitrators did not exceed their authority by awarding punitive damages for the customer; (2) the arbitrators did not exceed their authority in awarding customer compensatory damages representing out of pocket losses and costs; and (3) contract between the brokerage firm and the client permitted the arbitration panel to award punitive damages even though arbitration agreement, providing for the application of New York law, would prohibit such an award.
Davis v. Royal Alliance
897 F.Supp. 783 (SDNY)
The District Court held in favor of our client and directed the arbitration of claims against the brokerage firm relating to the broker’s outside business activities beyond the scope of his employment in misappropriating the client’s funds.
Mr. Lawlor has authored a number of chapters and has been a speaker at various Continuing Legal Education Programs relating to the securities arbitration process including seminars conducted by the New York State Bar Association, Practicing Law Institute and New York County Bar Association.