New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: John E. Zate vs. A.T. Bred & Company, Inc.. Kenneth P. Valentine, and Michael L Brod Attorneys: For Clainnnt(8): Thomas R. Grady Esq. - Naples. FL For Respondent(s): Charles J. Hecht Esq. - New York. NY Thomas McCabe Esq. - New York. NY Date Filed: 04/24/92 First Scheduled: 10/22/92 Decided: April 12, 1993 Case Summary: customer vs. Member Firm and Registered Rep

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Osvakio Ariel Rivera v Menill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith and Bank One. Columbus. N.A. Anorneys: For Ctalnwni(s): OsMaldo Ariel Rivera - San Juaa PR For Raapondenl(«): V. James Mann Esq. - New York, NY Date RIed: 04/20/02 First Scheduled: 12/10/92 Decided: 12/10/92 Case Summary: Claimant, a customer, alleges that respondent wrongfully allowed checio to be bounced whu

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between y NYSE Case: A.M.E. international v Prudential-Bache & Robert Limmer Attorneys: For Claimant(s): David P. Lonski Esq. - New Brunswksk, NJ For Respondent(s): Laura Brevetti Esq. - New York, NY Date Filed: 04/13/92 Case Summary: claimant, a customer, has; NHL Nelson, Bally corp. and Circle K securities. First Scheduled: 11/24/92 Decided: 02/08/93 alleged that resp

In the Mstt-Si" of Ar'txiti"2t.ion Between MVCP raaa) Pyw [}_ Frsricijr. Sue tt. Frs!tklir. & R. 0.. (^rsiikiiT! Electric, Ice. v.. Ssdth Barss" Harris "^^s !: Cc. IK;. % Johr. B. Fsr £isis3st(sJt; Jchr, ft. KsadsiS. iss^, - yi!£tsr.~Ssla5, K p(M> l>•Qn^wM^j«w^fc}i; John fe'.'idsar! - Chsrlstts, NC. ifthn Dauidsoi! " Sslsish, N C Ljrr". H. Iron E=". - Vsa Vsrk, M Y ria+a C^ldrf- ftt/inw? i;4< .e4- QoKarliilBrI' lO/nRi'q'? naf^aarl* If

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Cenpac Corp. v Sheerson Lehman Brothers. Inc. Attorneys: For ClaitnBnt(s): Adolph D. Seltzer Esq. - New York, NY For Respondent(8): Gerry E. Feinberg Esq. - New York. NY Date Filed: 04/09/92 First Scheduled: 10/14/92 Decided: 10/26/93 Case Summary: claimant, a customer, alleges Respondent, a Member Firm, failed to execute Claimant's order to purchase put opti

AWARD NASD Dispute Resolution In the Matter of the Arbitration Between Name of Claimant Michael A. Sowell and 01-04731' Phoenix, Arizona Name of Respondents Merit Capital Associates, Inc. Robert Fitzpatrick, Russell Newton, Bruce C. Ryan, David Gwynn, Raquel Gwynn and Gwynn Financial Services REPRESENTATION OF PARTIES Michael A. Sowell ("Claimant") was represented by Frank W. Moskowitz, Esq., Berk & Moskowitz, P.C., Scottsdale, A

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Welner Rabenstein v Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc. Attorneys: For Clainiant(s): Weiner Rabenstein -. Fbr Respondem(s): Kevin McKay Esq. - New York. NY Date Filed: 04/02/92 First Scheduled: 07/01/92 Decided: 07/01/92 Case Summary: claimant, a customer, alleges that respondent delayed in paying an arbitration award. Product: Market: Claim Data Claim

New York Stock Exchange ^n the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: PaineWebber, Inc. v William H. Louche Attorneys: For Cleiment(s): Michael R. Alford Esq. - Miami, FL For Respondent(s): William H. Louche - Orlando, FL Date Filed: 04A)7/92 First Scheduled: 10/22/92 Decided: 01/12/93 Case Summary: Member Firm vs. Customer seeking to recover a debit account balance ellegedly arising from Respondent unsuccessful commodity trading i

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between- NYSE Case: Wlllla r. Rood v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Inc. and John Doeg Attorneys: For OaimantfB): Morton A. Faller Esq. - Washington, DC For RBspQndent(s): Jeffrey P. Bloom Esq. - Washington, DC Date Filed: 04/05/92 Case Summary: Customer v short Prime Computer Co. First Scheduled: 03/30/93 Deckled: April 14, 1993 Member Firm & Registered Repre

New York Stock Exchange NYSE .n the Matter of Arbitration Between Case: Daniel D. Berger v. Pacific Brokerage Securities Inc. Attorneys: For ClaiinaiTt(s). Daniel D. Berger - South Pasadena, CA For Respondent(s): James R. Kruger - Los /\ngeles, CA Date Filed: 03/20/92 First Scheduled: ;/Vy/y3 °^''^- *jiib3 Case Summary: customer v. member firm alleging respondent failed to give the claimant the proper information concerning claimant's investment