AAA - Respondent's Post-Hearing Brief - Appendix 6B - Securities Arbitration: Practice and Forms
W. Reece Bader is a Partner in the Frankfurt office of Orrick and is a member of the Securities Litigation/Regulatory Group. Prior to moving to the Frankfurt office in 2008, Mr. Bader was located in the firm's Paris, Washington, D.C, Silicon Valley, New York and San Francisco offices. He has concentrated his practice in the area of securities and futures litigation since 1970. He has extensive experience, including substantial jury and non-jury trial work in broker-dealer litigation including securities, commodities and public finance. He also handles appellate matters and has represented the Securities Industry Association as amicus curiae in broker-dealer litigation. He has acted as lead defense counsel in complex class actions involving initial public offerings and derivative suits, both on behalf of underwriters, companies and officers and directors. He also regularly represents broker-dealers and individuals in both SEC and SRO enforcement actions. Mr. Bader has argued cases before the D.C., Second, Third, Ninth and Federal Circuits. He serves as an arbitrator for FINRA, NYSE and NFA, and the Center for Public Resources (Distinguished Neutrals Panel). He is a former member of the National Arbitration and Mediation Committee of the NASDR, past Co-Chair of the Securities Litigation Committee, and past Co-Chair of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee of the ABA's Litigation Section. Mr. Bader is a frequent lecturer and panelist for such organizations as the Practising Law Institute, ALI/ABA, FINRA and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association.
Originally from Securities Arbitration: Practice and Forms
AAA - Respondent’s Post-Hearing Brief
In the Matter of the
vs. RESPONDENT’S BRIEF
Respondent* submits this brief at request of Arbitrator, _______________________.
In this action, plaintiff [Claimant] is claiming that, that although he admittedly signed an agreement whereby he became a limited partner in a New York State limited partnership, he has the right to an immediate and full return of his contribution in exception to the clearly defined terms of that contract. His basis for that demand is:
a) He was not given enough time to review partnership documents and evaluate the business of the partnership although he signed documents relating to the exact amount of trial period time he had in which to act.
b) There was non-disclosure to the claimant of allegations made by the Securities and Exchange Commission to the General Partner although such allegations pertained to a former and completely unrelated business and were settled by respondent and the SEC without the General Partner admitting or denying any allegations, after claimant became a partner. Nor did respondent’s background have any bearing whatsoever on claimant.