Bourdev v. JPMorgan Chase ⇒ $350,000 + revision of Form U-5 language

$350,000 on behalf of a registered representative/banker who was terminated from JPMorgan Chase. After a full evidentiary hearing, a FINRA arbitration panel awarded $350,000 in compensatory damages for defamation and/or wrongful termination and ordered that the language on her Form U-5 be changed to reflect that she did not engage in any wrongdoing and that the company conducted a deficient investigation.

site navigation
Attorney Profile
Practice Areas
Case Results
Testimonials
In The News
Current Interest
Contact Info
Home Page


“Cary Lapidus is probably the most well prepared attorney with whom I have ever dealt. He has excellent judgment and understanding of the law. Most important of all, he is highly ethical and those who deal with him know that his word is his bond.“
Paul Dubow
Opposing Counsel & Mediator in Six Cases


In The News

ARROW MURDER CASE AGENT OWES $204,886
Daily Journal
December 27, 1990

In a footnote to the bizarre murder-for-hire charges against sports agent Michael Blatt, a state appeals court has affirmed a $204,886 arbitration award on behalf of one of Blatt's alleged targets, former professional football player John Farley.
The 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento ruled Monday at Farley, a one-time running back with the Cincinnati Bengals, was entitled to recover out-of-pocket costs, plus interest and tax liability, attorneys fees and punitive damages under the terms of a management agreement with Blatt's attorney.
Blast, the former operator of Sun West Sports, was indicted for commissioning the murder of a real estate associate, Lawrence Carnegie, because of business differences, and for the attempted murder of Farley, allegedly over the arbitration dispute.
Two men who admitted to killing Carnegie testified they were first instructed by Blatt to murder Farley. When Farley could not be located, Blatt allegedly told him the men to concentrate on Carnegie, who was killed with arrow fired from a crossbow in February 1989.
On October 31, a jury in Oakland deadlocked 8-4 for Blatt's conviction on a conspiracy charge and the attempted murder of Farley, and 9-3 on a similar charge in the Carnegie slaying. Prosecutors said they will retry the case next month. Blatt remains in jail without bond.
The civil dispute in Blatt v. Farley, 90 Daily Journal D.A.R. 14637, involved in arbitration clause in a management contract Farley signed with Blatt in 1984.
Farley, a running back at Sacramento State University, was drafted by Cincinnati and signed to a one-year contract for approximately $100,000 for the 1984 season. As Farley's registered agent and investment advisor, Blatt placed his client in an $80,000 tax shelter that was 'totally unsuitable' to his financial situation, according to Farley's attorney, Cary S. Lapidus. 'It was clearly unsuitable because the average life of a professional football player is about three years' said Lapidus, a name partner in San Francisco's Lapidus and Reiff. 'There was no way Farley would need that kind of sophisticated tax shelter for five or six years.'
In fact, Farley played only one year with the Bengals before a crippling knee injury ended his career. As a result, he was unable to make additional payments to the shelter agreement and lost his contribution.
Farley filed an arbitration claim for $80,000 under the terms of his contract with the Blatt. The arbitrator uppe to the award to $204,886 to include more than $60,000 in lost interest, text liabilities and administrative expenses; $10,000 in punitive damages; and $49,000 in attorneys fees.
Blatt's attorney, Michael F Babitzke, argued that Farley's demand was for $80,000 with no provision in the agreement for tax liabilities or legal fees. He also argued that the arbitrator failed to deduct $50,000 Farley recovered from Prudential-Bache Securities, which marketed the tech shelter to investors.
The third district disagree. 'We may set aside the arbitrators construction of the contract only upon a finding that the arbitrator gave a completely irrational construction to the provisions in dispute,' wrote Justice Richard M. Simms III. The award which included fees and charges was clearly rational, Sims noted. Justices Roberts K. Puglia and Frances Newell Carr concurred.
Babitzke, a sole practitioner from Stockton, said he would like to appeal the ruling but Blatt would have to make the final decision.



Please contact us for assistance with securities arbitration law, securities litigation, broker misconduct, investment advisor misconduct and investment losses.

footer_top Practice Areas  |  Results  |  Attorney Profile  |  Testimonials  |  News  |  Current Interest  |  Contact Us  |  Home footer_bottom