Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> The Law Planet Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: The Law Planet BlogPIABA proposed rule change regarding the arbitration panel makeup is too extreme
By Dobin & Jenks
The Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association has proposed a rule directly to the SEC that would effectively eliminate the ?industry? arbitrator from the arbitration panel. The paranoia exhibited by this organization, without any true empirical basis, knows no bounds.
As a lawyer who represents both industry and investor clients, I have a unique position to assess this proposal (although I am not alone in representing both types of parties.) PIABA remains critical of the presence of a person experienced in the industry on an arbitration panel. Personally, having experienced arbitrations where the industry panelist was marginally affiliated and the public arbitrators knew next to nothing about securities, I suggest that we should all be afraid of PIABA?s proposal.
PIABA continually refers to the industry panelist as an advocate for the industry. There is no basis for this. The organization cites flawed research that states that claimants in arbitration win less than they ?should.? But how does PIABA know that these cases would have fared better either in court or with an all-public arbitration panel? It doesn?t. I have stated before and I will say it again, that cases that go to hearing tend to be self-selecting. Those cases which can?t settle because the Claimant wants too much or the Respondent won?t pay enough are the ones that go to hearing. Therefore, these are the more difficult, or bad, cases depending on one?s point of view.
I have been involved in a number of cases where it was obvious that the industry panelist did not agree with the Respondent?s position. There is no evidence that the industry panelist serves as a patsy for the brokerage firms. Just because a flawed analysis finds that the ?win rate? is down, does not mean that the system is bad. In arbitration, each case stands on its own. Two cases cannot be compared as every person?s situation is different.
PIABA has come up with some good ideas in the past. This is not one of them.
Rule Change Petition presented to the SEC from the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association
Full post as published by The Law Planet Blog on July 07, 2009 (boomark / email).
Copyright Lawsuits: Critical Issues Before Filing Copyright
Federa Rule 11(b) Considerations
FDA
Requests Labeling Change for Singulair, Accolate and Zyflo and Zyflo CR
Darvocet
FDA Expert Panel Votes for Ban
Insignia
26-Inch Flat-Panel LCD TVs Recalled
Gulf War Syndrome
Panel Confirms it's Real, and Identifies Causes
Pull Vicodin, Percocet
Expert Panel Advises FDA
Settlement Proposed in Class Action Against Facebook
Facebook will Close Beacon in Proposed Settlement

PIABA Submits Petition to SEC to Eliminate Requirement of Industry Arbitrator in Customer Disputes
PIABA Files Petition With SEC To Remove Industry Arbitrator Requirement
FINRA Files Proposed Changes to Arbitration Code
FINRA Files Rule Change to Raise Amount in Controversy for Single Arbitrator
FMCS Issues Notice of Proposed Rule Making Re: Arbitration
SEC Approves FINRA Arbitration Rule on Explained Decisions








