I feel ambivalent about this. I will certainly lose productivity as a result, but why should lawyers be exempt. It’s an inconvenience, for sure, but isn’t it better to have a true cross-section than to limit it only to those people who are unable to figure out a way to get ouit of it?

Trial by jury is a fundamental right. I’ve served on one jury before, a criminal trial in New Jersey. I’m not sure it’s a smart idea to have a lawyer on the jury, but it may be useful to have a legal mind around.

We’ll see.

When I first started in the brokerage business, I was an in-house lawyer at Prudential-Bache Securities (which then became known as Prudential Securities, which was then purchased by Wachovia Securities, which was then purchased by Wells Fargo Advisors) in charge of the firm’s collections. I had a number of “interesting” cases, one of which involved a firm customer named Robert Bialkin. (Mr. Bialkin passed away in 2000, according to his New York Times obit.)

Mr. Bialkin owed Prudential-Bache money. I remember meeting him in my office. I had information that led me to believe that my physical safety was at risk, so I had the head of the firm’s corporate security department stand outside my office (with his gun discreetly holstered under his suit jacket). My meeting with Mr. Bialkin was uneventful, but unproductive. He was not going to pay the firm the substantial sum he owed.

We started litigation in Boston in Federal Court. We were represented by Bingham, Dana & Gould (now known as Bingham McCutcheon). My direct testimony was submitted by affidavit, as was Mr. Bialkin’s if I recall correctly. Anyway, I became aware that Mr. Bialkin claimed that I had threatened him in my office. He said that I told him something along the lines of “I want my f—-ing money.” I am known to use the occasional profanity, but I recall specifically not using it when talking to Mr. Bialkin. Remember, I was concerned about my safety.

As I said, my direct testimony was by affidavit but I flew to Boston to be cross-examined in front of the jury. Mr. Bialkin’s lawyer asked me if I threatened his client. I told him no. He asked if I had used the profanity I described above. I told him I was certain I did not. He made the fatal mistake of asking me “why?” And I told him what I had learned about his client and that I was concerned about my physical safety. He objected to my testimony, but the jury had heard it. We won the trial.

Mr. Bialkin appealed. I recall the appeal and the briefing. I kind of wish I had it, because it would probably be entertaining reading, like a walk down memory lane. As I recall, one of the appellate issues was whether it was appropriate to allow my less-than-favorable testimony about the background I had developed on Mr. Bialkin and its effect on the jury. The First Circuit ruled here. Mr. Bialkin was unsuccessful. The court essentially said “Your lawyer asked the question. Just because you didn’t like the answer, doesn’t mean it should be stricken.” and upheld the jury’s verdict. That was 1992 (and I can’t remember what I had for lunch yesterday.)

The old saw “Don’t ask a question you don’t know the answer to” sometimes applies. In this case, it sure did.

That’s a nostalgic view of one lawyer from Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. I’m a warm and toasty Marc Dobin.

Nobody should be surprised by this. I’ve been telling people for years that Equity Indexed Annuities are the roach motel of investments. Now Investment News has run an article that backs me up. Indexed annuities ‘terrible ideas’ for seniors, says Wharton prof – Investment News

These things are garbage. I really wonder what kind of defect someone possesses to sell them to a customer, particularly a senior. And, now that the insurance industry has gotten their way, they are still not regulated as securities. So any person with an insurance license can sell this junk to the unsuspecting public.

I have discussed this before, and an apologist named Sheryl Moore has called me, written me and blogged about me. She thinks I’m wrong. I’m not and now a Wharton professor agrees. Now if she could only spell my name correctly. She claims to be an industry expert. But she does not claim to be an expert on spelling.

These “products” are hard to understand, difficult to unwind and expensive to own. I can’t fathom why anyone would sell one.

That’s the unindexed annuity view of one lawyer from Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. I’m Marc Dobin

My firm is adverse to the same brokerage firm in two arbitrations. They are not particularly big cases, but after more than 10 years of litigating against the same firm, I realized that it appears to be a mindset.

I just returned from vacation. It is one of the few times during the year that I turn off the cellphone, email and fax. Instead, I spend time “enjoying” my family (they seem to act like it’s a burden) and we all perform an ancient ritual called “reading.”

In my case, I read fictional war thrillers and an occasional book related to my profession. While at the library, I came across “The Big Short”, written by Michael Lewis. For those of you that remember when music came in a form other than CD, he also wrote “Liar’s Poker.” I was fascinated by the simple analysis that ultimate resulted in some people making a ton of money due to the greed and/or stupidity of others.

Basically, Mr. Lewis described several investors, none of whom were big firm Wall Street types, who figured out those teaser rates, and loans that didn’t require any payments, that suckered in countless homebuyers would ultimately crash and burn. Their analysis told them that it would happen in mid to late 2007 or early 2008. And they were right.

These people did not “bet” against the homeowners. They bought Credit Default Swaps and other pieces of garbage that Wall Street devised as a means to make more money. Wall Street did not expect the CDSes and other derivative instruments to blow up in their collective faces. All that these investors did was buy the insurance, for about a 2% premium, on pools of mortgages that had the worst of the worst in them, negative amortization mortgages, teaser low-interest ARMS and teaser rate interest-only ARMs among them.

And these investors just waited for things to blow up. Which they did. Mr. Lewis also describes how the garbage loans were packaged together and, amazingly, the ratings services would give them Triple-A ratings. Somehow, the ratings services believed that if you assembled enough garbage into one can, it smelled like a rose. Hmmmm.

Reading this book reminded me of a situation shortly before the tech market crash in 2000. I was talking to a brokerage executive and we discussed how a fireman in New York had quit his job to write a mutual fund newsletter. We agreed that this was the first indication that the world would collapse. And it did collapse within about 18 months of this discussion.

Lewis serves as a good historian in “The Big Short.” And remember what they say – If you don’t learn about history, you are doomed to repeat it.” Unfortunately, most people don’t remember the saying. Read the book. I can’t say enough good things about it.

That’s the mortgaged, but not underwater, view of one lawyer from Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. I’m Marc Dobin.