Those of you who know me, know that it is hard for me to keep my mouth shut. Sometimes this is a detriment.

I recently wrote to the editor of Law Technology News, Monica Bay, concerning my opinion about Thomson Reuters’ acquisition of some software I am using. We got to “talking”, via email, and next thing I know, she asked me to write a story about the firm’s use of technology. So I did.

And now I’m published. I love the title “Once and Again Solo” which is pretty much the way I’ve felt over the last two years. I had a firm, then I was solo, then I was with a firm, then solo again.

If you read the article, I hope you enjoy it. I enjoyed writing it. It pointed out to me exactly how complex it can be just to run a two-lawyer practice. And that my wife definitely can be described as “long-suffering.”

That’s the view of one Lawyer from Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida.

Investment News reports that a small California broker-dealer, Pyramid Securities, has been told by FINRA to close its doors for net capital violations. This is a result of a securities arbitration award against the firm in the amount of $339,000. From reading the article, it appears that the firm does not have the money, or insurance, to pay the award.

And that brings up the scary part of doing business in today’s environment. The entry cost is fairly low for anyone to set up a broker-dealer and then do significant damage. I have represented customers in arbitration claims where I have heard, more than once, “if you win, you’ll put us out of business.” Given what I’ve seen, that would not necessarily be a bad thing.

But Pyramid does have some money. It hired a lawyer to get an injunction to stop FINRA from shutting the firm down. The Federal judge has said no, for now. Which means that Pyramid will go the way of Jesup & Lamont, another firm with net capital issues.

I don’t pretend to know how to calculate net capital. I think computers do it, for now. But the question an investor should ask of him or herself is “what happens if something goes wrong? Who stands behind the guy who is selling me this idea? What if I need legal recourse?” In a number of instances, the broker-dealer is only worth as much as the credit line on the owner’s credit card.

Some of you may say “What about SIPC?” SIPC may cover some unauthorized trading losses, if the firm goes out of business. But SIPC is not an insurer or guarantor against market losses. Neither is a brokerage firm. But there are bad apples out there. There are brokers whose sole interest is lining their own pockets. When that occurs, arbitration is generally the recourse. And if you win against one of these small firms, you may be able to use the award to wallpaper your bathroom, but that’s about it.

So ask questions? What insurance do you have? How much in cash reserves do you have? Who stands behind your company? And get it in writing.

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

I love technology. It usually makes my life easy. I love saving money. I love technology that helps me save money. And I must add that I am a big Google fan. I have a Gmail account. I have a Google Voice number. My business email is hosted by Google.

I noticed something new in my Gmail account today. It told me, in the Chat section, that I could make telephone calls with my Gmail chat client. I tried it. I called my friend, Joel Beck in Atlanta to try it out. He remarked that I sounded like I was on a good quality speakerphone. In effect, I was. I was using the microphone on my laptop and the speakers on my desk.

Joel sounded great. Then we did Google video chat. Unfortunately, there’s only so much a webcam can do for the subject (sorry Joel). Google has said that it will keep the service free through the end of the year and then see what happens.

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

There are times when I just wonder where the justice is. I represent, and have represented, former Citigroup (Now Morgan Stanley Smith Barney)brokers in arbitration claims filed by the firm seeking recovery of promissory note money. Citigroup isn’t alleging that my clients did anything wrong other than refusing to pay back the money Citi claims that it is owed.

On the other hand, my clients’ careers have been devastated, for the most part. The past several years have not been great ones to be a broker, particularly a low to mid-level producer at a firm looking to make itself look pretty for a suitor. That was the case with Prudential Securities brokers in 2002-2003 and it was the case more recently when Smith Barney and Morgan Stanley were doing the dance. Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney made it very clear that honest, hardworking (though not financially successful) brokers were not going to be able to hang around the firm any longer.

It did not matter if the broker came to work every day. It did not matter that the broker had no customer complaints or regulatory problems. It did not matter that the broker needed what little money the firm was willing to pay, even at a 20 or 25% payout. The broker just wanted to work and have the opportunity to build up his or her book of business. Instead, of course, the firms made it impossible to make a living and forced the brokers through the door. Then, Citigroup files an arbitration to recoup the money that the brokers were living on because their business collapsed.

Meanwhile, at the top of the food chain, two senior executives were caught by the SEC telling untruths about Citigroup’s exposure to sub-prime mortgages. They did it “unintentionally” we are told. Who cares. They did it, they messed up and their total fines were $180,000. You can read about it here.

According to Citigroup’s proxy statement, Gary Crittenden, who paid a $100,000 fine, received compensation totaling over $12,000,0000 in 2008. How is he supposed to learn from this experience?

In the 2009 Proxy Statement, it was disclosed that he received a $350,000 housing allowance, including a car and a driver, for the slightly more than six months he worked at Citigroup in 2009. My clients are lucky to to have a car that starts in the morning. This means that he had to give up less than 30% of his car allowance in 2009. I hope he was able to survive on what was left over from 2008.

That’s the angry view of one Lawyer From Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. I’m Marc Dobin.

According to this website, Jesup & Lamont, Inc. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection today. Perhaps this phoenix will rise from the ashes, but I doubt it will do so under current management. A sixth grade lemonade stand might have been run better.

It’s a shame, too. Jesup was a storied name, but so were Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Mercury. But they all suffered from the same problem – bad management and more desirable competitors. And let’s not forget that there are FINRA employees who have broken out the champagne and are doing cartwheels in the hallways. (Although they would never admit it.)

I fell badly for some of the employees, too. (But not their management team.) At least some of their registered representatives have landed with another firm, Anderson Strudwick of Richmond, Virginia. I wish them the best. Maybe they’ll flourish without the burden of working for their former employer.

The interesting question now is, what will happen to all the brokers who were named in arbitrations while Jesup employees. Being a broker formerly employed by a now-defunct brokerage firm is akin to being the last member of Saddam Hussein’s private army, and you didn’t find out that Saddam surrendered. You keep fighting the fight, but you have only your own resources to back you up. We shall see.

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

Here it is –

Jersey Shore at NYSE

What’s next, is Snooki going to sit as a Hearing Officer at a Disciplinary Hearing?

This is just so wrong.

That’s the astonished view of One Lawyer from Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. I’m Marc Dobin.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Irving Picard, the Madoff Investment Trustee, intends to sue about 1,000 investors who withdrew more than they put into the Madoff fraud. Mr. Picard faces a December 2010 filing deadline to start his lawsuits. This is not just going to be an inconvenience for some people, it could mean the end of their lifestyle as they know it.

This will leave these investors with a predicament. Do they spend down some of their remaining money to fight the lawsuit and argue that they don’t owe the money back? Do they argue that it is unfair because they didn’t know about the fraud, or that they spent the money? Do the try and cut a deal with the Trustee, who seems determined to treat everyone “equally”.

And fairness issues become very tangled. What happens to the person who spent the money in an unrecoverable manner, like a round-the-world trip, or something less extravagant like a grandchild’s college education? Will Mr. Picard try to drill down and recover the funds? Will he require the sale of long-held assets that were unrelated to the fraud? These are difficulty legal, practical and moral issues that the trustee will have to address.

In the meantime, it is likely that a cottage industry of Madoff defense lawyers will develop. They will develop some sort of strategy to deal with the Madoff Trustee’s lawsuits. Time will tell.

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

Holy crap this can be fun sometimes. Let’s see, customers have filed numerous arbitrations against their firms for mortgage-backed securities. Charles Schwab may have been among those firms, I haven’t taken a deep dive into the FINRA Awards database or Brokercheck, but I would venture a guess that there’s at least claim.

So Schwab thinks it’s been lied to, Investment News reports. So what does Schwab do? It files suit alleging misrepresentation against a number of the big players on Wall Street.

Notice that I said “suit” and not “arbitration.” Apparently someone at Schwab missed that part of the FINRA Constitution and Rules. So the first move should be to compel arbitration. I’m guessing that this is a strategic move to scare the broker/dealers into a settlement rather than face exhaustive discovery, either in court or arbitration, against a well-funded and angry opponent.

It seems like Claimants’ lawyers everywhere may want to see a bouquet of flowers to the General Counsel at Schwab.

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

In a terse press release, Jesup & Lamont announced that it is reducing its staff to a minimum. Jesup stated that it is terminating “all non-essential personnel.”

One can only hope that the firm’s general counsel, Todd Zuckerbrod, is shown the door. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that his treatment of FINRA put the firm in regulator’s crosshairs. And with the pending motion to confirm/cross-motion to vacate of the Devore decision, things will probably get worse. Devore is the case that Jesup actually won on liability but was sanctioned $60,000 for discovery violations.

And word on the street is that Jesup lost its big case with the former clearing firm for Empire Financial, Penson, and was ordered to pay Penson’s legal fees. I’m still waiting to see that award.

Mr. Zuckerbrod is not the only person to blame. The executives at Jesup allowed him to conduct himself in this manner. They ratified his boorish behavior, as described in the press, and kept him in place. In doing so, they encouraged him to act in a manner that appears to have resulted in a fight with FINRA that, ultimately, led to the firm’s near-death experience. Congratulations, boys, you managed to sully the name of an institution that survived any number of market crashes, economic downturns and the like.

But you just couldn’t survive your own bad behavior.

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