AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Ed kershner paine webber12/9/2023 2d 348 (1973) (state law not preempted when Rule 347(b) arbitration does not promote self-policing of securities abuses by exchanges). 2d 389 (1963) (exchange self-regulation designed to curb securities abuses), with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. Second, the securities industry is to some extent unique because self-regulation by registered exchanges is based upon statute. In short, doubts should be resolved in favor of coverage. An order to arbitrate should not be denied unless it can be said that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of a reasonable interpretation covering the asserted dispute. First, arbitration agreements are favored in the law and are to be broadly construed. They are mentioned in this opinion only to demonstrate that they have not been overlooked. We start with some propositions that are so basic as to amount to truisms in the present state of the law. And making the same communications to the investment community, including Coudert's professional colleagues and clients, is said to have been "extreme" and "outrageous" and to have been intended to cause and in fact did cause her severe emotional distress. The statements are also said to have placed her in a false light before her customers and her professional colleagues by falsely portraying her as unfit to continue as an investment adviser, giving rise to the second cause of action. 1 The fact that these statements are alleged to be false and malicious and to have been made with reckless disregard of the truth gave rise to her defamation action. Coudert further alleged that despite assurances by a senior vice president of Paine Webber that her permanent record would accurately reflect her voluntary resignation, the office manager nevertheless filed or caused to be filed termination forms with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the New York Stock Exchange and other exchanges, the National Association of Securities Dealers and various state securities departments that falsely stated that she was fired for cause. The plaintiff's complaint goes on to allege that the office manager later told her former co-workers that she had been fired and had not resigned, told brokers at Paine Webber's Stamford office the same thing, suggested to her clients who called Paine Webber that "he had to do it," and intimated that she had left Paine Webber under clouded circumstances. He asked her if she intended to change firms and upon her affirmative response, in which she stated that her resignation was to be effective immediately, he replied, "No, I am going to terminate you as of Friday" (August 21, 1981). On August 24, 1981, a Monday, she went to Paine Webber's Fairfield office to resign and discovered that the office manager had removed certain things from her desk during the preceding weekend. to become a vice president at its Darien, Connecticut, office. But in July 1981, after advising her office manager that she was unhappy with the lack of support given to representatives in her office, and, receiving no satisfaction or assurances, she sought and received an offer from Bache, Halsey, Stuart, Shields, Inc. According to the plaintiff's complaint, she was employed by Paine Webber Jackson & Curtis (Paine Webber) as an account executive for eleven years, during which she established a clientele and good reputation as an investment advisor in the Fairfield, Connecticut, area.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |