August 2006. Edward Larkin recently participated as a panelist at a Securities Arbitration seminar in New York sponsored by the Practicing Law Institute. Ed's morning panel addressed the current responsibilities of securities industry professionals, including brokers and supervisors, with respect to management and supervision of customer accounts. Ed's afternoon panel addressed an attorneys' ethical responsibilities in connection with the overall arbitration process. Seminar attendees were provided with a two-volume course handbook, which included an article co-authored by Ed entitled Mediation Redux: Now More Than Ever Suggestions for Practitioners.

For copies of the seminar agenda and Ed's article, click on the following links.
PLI Seminar Agenda
Mediation Redux

June 2006. Neil Baritz recently prevailed at a specially set evidentiary hearing before a full panel of NASD arbitrators on a Motion to Dismiss. The purpose of the evidentiary hearing was to consider Respondents' Motion to Dismiss based on applicable statutes of limitation. Importantly, the NASD panel of arbitrators conducted an evidentiary hearing early on in the administration of the case and strictly enforced the state statutes of limitations applicable to the claims. At the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing, the panel dismissed the matter in its entirety, well in advance of final hearings. For a copy of the decision, click on the following link. Gars vs. FFP Securities, Inc.

May 2006. Baritz & Colman is proud to announce the celebration of its tenth year. Memorial Day 2006 marks the tenth anniversary of the founding of the firm and the second anniversary of the firm's New York office (located in the historic Woolworth Building in lower Manhattan). We take great pleasure in thanking our clients and friends for all their support. We look forward to many more years of continued success.

December 2005. In a recently released 11th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, in a matter of first impression in this Circuit, the Court found that diversity jurisdiction in the Federal Court is proper when a party seeking to challenge an arbitration award of less than the statutory minimum of $75,000 is also seeking a new arbitration hearing seeking an amount above the statutory minimum. In rejecting the argument that Federal Court jurisdiction was not proper, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals also denied Petitioner's efforts to vacate the zero dollar award. Neil Baritz successfully defended Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated at the NASD arbitration hearings and in the post-award efforts at vacating the NASD arbitration award. For a copy of the decision, click on the following link.
Don Peebles vs Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc.

June 2005. Baritz & Colman celebrates the one year anniversary of the opening of its New York offices. June 2005 marks the one year anniversary of the establishment of the firm's New York offices and we thank our clients and friends for making our success at this new location possible.

May 2005. Baritz & Colman is proud to announce the celebration of their ninth year. Memorial Day 2005 marks the ninth anniversary of the founding of the firm. We take great pleasure in thanking our clients and friends for all their support. We look forward to many more years of continued success.

February 15, 2005, Neil Baritz presented a seminar to a large insurance company in New York regarding the defense of securities arbitration claims which involve the sale of variable annuities. The Agenda covered a broad range of materials regarding variable annuities as well as "how to" defend arbitration claims involving annuities. The presentation also included a discussion of the issues involved in representing broker/dealers and their associated persons in the current regulatory environment.

Download Agenda