Securities Law Commons^™

Arbitration Case Law Update 2015, Jill I. Gross

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This chapter identifies decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and selected federal circuit and high state courts in the past year that interpret and apply the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and could have an impact on securities arbitration practice.

Justice Scalia's Hat Trick And The Supreme Court's Flawed Understanding Of Twenty-First Century Arbitration, Jill I. Gross

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In this article, I report on the results of my close examination of more than two dozen opinions the Court has handed down interpreting the FAA--arising primarily from commercial, consumer, employment, or securities disputes--since the beginning of the twenty-first century only fifteen years ago.19 I focus on cases in which the Court was asked to decide a question of arbitrability--whether a claim is arbitrable or whether an agreement to arbitrate is enforceable under FAA section 2. I have concluded that these decisions are built on a narrative of an arbitration process that no longer exists, although it may have existed …

Major Investor Losses Due To Conflicted Advice: Brokerage Industry Advertising Creates The Illusion Of A Fiduciary Duty, Joseph C. Peiffer, Christine Lazaro

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

No national standard exists today requiring brokerage firms to put their clients’ interests first by avoiding making profits from conflicted advice. In the five years since the passage of the Dodd Frank Act, inaction by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on a fiduciary standard has cost American investors nearly $80 billion, based on estimated losses of $17 billion per year.

Amid encouraging recent signs of possible action from the Department of Labor and the SEC, there is a compelling case to be made for a ban on conflicted advice in order to protect investors. In the absence of …