THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 2004
AGENDA

FIRST KEYNOTE SPEAKER

THE ROLE OF LAW IN SECURITIES ARBITRATIONS: AN ARBITRATOR'S VIEW
After many years of experience sitting as an arbitrator and chairing panels, Bud Carrey discusses whether arbitrators apply the law in deciding arbitration disputes or state the reasons for their decisions. Discussion also of finality of arbitrators' decisions and awards.

SUITABILITY AND CHURNING
Classic customer dispute complaints.  Indices of churning, contours of suitability.  Punitive damages.

Suitability of the fee-based brokerage account. The different ways in which broker-dealers have re-priced traditional brokerage services. When a suitability claim arises from a fee structure that results in a greater cost to the customer than an alternative program offered by the broker-dealer, factors other than cost become important considerations.

CREATIVE DISCOVERY
With only limited discovery permitted in securities arbitration, winning often turns on evidence secured from third parties and unconventional (and often comical) sources.

LITIGATING AGAINST NON-ATTORNEY "SECURITIES ADVISORS"
Non-attorneys often represent claimants. Is it the unlawful practice of law? Practical aspects of having a non-lawyer on the other side. Securities Arbitration Consultants take on the role of attorneys.

DEFENDING AGAINST "SELLING AWAY" CLAIMS
Winning cases where employees go into business for themselves, selling unregistered securities, promissory note investments, viatical settlements, pay phone schemes, etc., that go bad.  What to do when the customer blames the employer.  Is the brokerage agreement effective? Can the customer be required to arbitrate?

DEFEATING DAMAGE CALCULATIONS AND EXPERTS
Attacking and defending against damage claims; churning, fraud, manipulation of stock prices, disgorgement. Discussion of the use of “net” damages to plaintiffs where they’ve made profits also. Discussion of the level of proof needed to poke holes in plaintiff’s evidence.

Discussion of the recent Citigroup settlement and its impact on the market, and on the fraud on the market theory.

WHERE DOCUMENT RETENTION MEETS OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
Lessons From the Trial of Frank Quattrone
The world of document and electronic data retention emerged into the spotlight with heightened penalties under Sarbanes-Oxley, new rules from the SEC, and high profile prosecutions for obstruction of justice based on destruction of documents. Mr. Murphy will discuss lessons learned from the trials of Frank Quattrone and others in this new legal landscape.

SECOND KEYNOTE SPEAKER

From The United States Securities and Exchange Commission, Division of Enforcement.

1:00p to 2:00p Working Lunch Break-out Sessions

2:00p (20 min.)
Tom Redburn
Lowenstein Sandler
Roseland, NJ
Bio Firm

STATUTES OF LIMITATION
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 extended the statute of limitations for certain categories of claims under the federal securities laws. Courts and litigants have since struggled over how to interpret the new statute. Does the new limitations period apply to revive claims that were already time-barred when Sarbanes-Oxley was passed? Does it apply to negligence claims under the federal securities laws, or only to fraud-based claims? Additional topics to be discussed include recent developments concerning the standard for inquiry notice, and developing the statute of limitations defense in arbitration.

DEFENSES RELATED TO CHECKING-ACCOUNT-LIKE ATTRIBUTES OF ACCOUNTS
With the advent of discount brokers and online trading, the major full service brokerage firms were compelled to improve and expand their financial services in order to retain client assets. As a result, firms began to market themselves as more than investment advisors, offering customers full financial service accounts that could operate not only as their investment account, but as checking accounts as well. At the same time, consolidation, synergetic mergers, and a concerted effort by the major banks to upgrade their retail investment divisions infused the industry with the operational and administrative know-how to provide this added service almost seamlessly. Check-writing and debit card capability are now commonplace for customer accounts.

MARKET TIMING AND LATE TRADING
SEC enforcement proceedings which are not arbitration; defenses, strategies and practical concerns.

USING MEDIATION AS A SWORD IN ARBITRATION
The underused, but incredibly powerful weapon of mediation in securities arbitration cases. Using mediation as a vehicle for communicating with claimants, discrediting overly ambitious damages models, fleshing out claimant's motivations and the "real facts," even if the case does not settle.

WHEN BROKERS LEAVE: An Overview of Non-Solicitation, Trade Secrets and "Raiding" Claims
This presentation will focus on the claims against firms and brokers that arise when brokers move to a competing firm. The claims against the brokers usually focus on the brokers' alleged breaches of non-solicitation agreements, confidentiality agreements and misappropriation of trade secrets in connection with their attempts to continue to deal with their existing client base. The claims against the hiring firms focus on these actions and what has come to be known as "raiding." Raiding claims often arise when a new firm hires a group of brokers from a competitor. Mr. Iwrey will examine the legal bases for raiding claims and the uncharted raiding "code of conduct" that has resulted from recent arbitrations.

LOSS CAUSATION / TRANSACTION CAUSATION UNDER EMERGENT CAPITAL AND RELATED CASE LAW 
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act ("PSLRA") codified the requirement that a plaintiff must plead and prove loss causation as an essential element of a 10b-5 claim but does not explain how to do so. Many plaintiffs attempt to establish loss causation by alleging that defendant’s actions artificially inflated the value of the stock purchased by plaintiff. In determining whether such allegations satisfy a plaintiff’s burden, the courts of appeal are split. Attorney Roger Crane will explain the various ways in which a defendant may raise such an affirmative defense and dismiss a 10b-5 claim on the ground that plaintiff failed to plead and prove both transaction causation and loss causation.

Closing Remarks - 2004 Chair
Tracy Van Steenburgh
Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins & Johnson
Minneapolis, MN
Bio Firm