clients

Oct

2013

Jim Eccleston: Non-Solicitation Agreements: What Can You Say Without Crossing the Line?

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law:

John Lindsey, a former Edward Jones broker, found himself in hot water after accusations that he violated his non-solicitation agreement. In March 2012, Mr. Lindsey left Edward Jones to go independent, taking with him about half his clients. In response, Edward Jones promptly filed a request for an injunction and temporary restraining order. Edward Jones claimed Mr. Lindsey had violated his one-year non-solicitation agreement by misappropriating client information and wrongly soliciting clients. Specifically, Edward Jones’ non-solicitation agreement prohibits an advisor from soliciting clients of the firm for one year after the advisor’s departure.

In May 2012, the Ventura County Superior Court in Ventura, California granted the injunction, upholding Edward Jones’ non-solicitation agreement. However, Judge Tari Cody’s also found that nothing in that agreement prohibited Mr. Lindsey from servicing Edward Jones clients who reached out to him directly. Subsequent to the ruling, Edward Jones asked a FINRA arbitration panel to make the injunction permanent and requested $5 million in compensatory damages. Both of those requests were denied.

The arbitrators’ decision reaffirmed previous guidance given by FINRA’s predecessor, the National Association of Securities Dealers, which had issued a notice stating “that obtaining temporary restraining orders to prevent customers from following a registered representative to a different firm may be similar to the unfair practice of delaying transfers” of clients to a new advisor.

FINRA’s position has been that firms cannot do anything to stop clients from going to a broker of their choice. The court’s ruling reflects a similar position, stating that “[n]othing herein [the non-solicitation agreement] shall prohibit [Mr. Lindsey] or anyone else from: (a) continuing to provide services to [Mr. Lindsey’s] clients who have already moved business away from Edward Jones; (b) providing services to persons who have indicated that they wish to transfer their accounts from Edward Jones to permit [Mr. Lindsey] to continue as their financial advisor.”

The attorneys of Eccleston Law represent investors and advisers nationwide in securities and employment matters. Our attorneys draw on a combined experience of nearly 50 years in delivering the highest quality legal services.

Aug

2012

Large Defections from Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Leads to Recent Exists

Cultural changes and possibly a decrease in service levels to the adviser are believed to be the causes of the large defections from MSSB, according to a recent article in Investment News.

MSSB offices recently converted to the new “3D” technology. One of the features of this new technology includes a sophisticated price metric system, which analyzes typical fees and commissions charged to clients all over the country. The article suggests that this may be hindering selective, competitive pricing that reps wish to propose or provide to clients.

Meanwhile, MSSB spokesmen recently advised all reps to stay calm and that all is well with the conversions, with the new systems, and with the new culture.

Eccleston Law Offices counsel, represent and defend financial advisers nationwide in regulatory, compliance, disciplinary and employment matters in arbitration and litigation, and before regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators. We frequently defend forgivable loan collection actions, prosecute Form U-5 defamation actions, counsel advisers as to how to transition successfully from firm to firm and negotiate the best possible agreements with their new firm, and provide succession planning, buy-sell agreements and other exit strategies and strategic consulting, practice transitions, mergers, acquisitions and divestitures.