Vew York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Wllliam R. Lively and Juditti L. Lively v. Prudential Securities and Terri Carson Attorneys: Fiv Clainianl(s): Larry E. Fentress Esq. - Louisville, KY For ltespondefii(s): Steven M. Malina Esq. - Chtoago, IL Date Filed: 07/08/1995 First Sctieduled: 02/O6/1996 Decided: 4-3-1996 Case Summary: claimants altoge unsuitability. chuming and a failure lo supervise in connect

( y New York Stock Exchange NYSE In the Matter of Arbitration Between Case: Ann H. Stafford v Nora Barnes and Ktodar Peabody h. Co., Inc, Attorneys: f^CUmirtti): Charles Aunin Esq. - Richmond, VA Stephen T. Gannon Esc), • Rtohmonl VA Rv RaHNNtdtantH: Rtohard Kaily Esq - New York, NV Date Filed: 07/10/1995 First Scheduled: oi/ion996 Case Summary: claimant ataoasilwi Respondems toduced her into ImwMing to i nature of ihe invertmeni

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: C. Calvin smith v. Edward D. Jones & Co.,L.P. Attorneys: For Clairnanl(s): Rodney J. Heggy Esq. - Oktohoma City, OK For Respondenl(s): J.W. Coyto III - Oktohoma City, OK Date Filed: 07/14/1995 First Sctieduled: 03/05/1996 Decided: 3-19-1996 Case Summary: Claimant was terminated by Respondent and the Respondent filed a form U-5 whteh indtoated that the Ctolmant wa

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Prudential Securities Inc. v Harpreet Bindra Attorneys: For Claimant(s): Teodore A. Krebsbach Esq. - White Ptoins, NY For Respondent(s): Harpreet H. Bindra - New York, NY Date Filed: 07/17/1995 First Sctieduled: 12/18/1995 Decided: 03/11/1996 Case Summary: Claimant emptoyed Respondent and provtoed him witti a loan in the amount of $47,000. The Promissory Note stated

y New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Smith Bamey v Robert Mercado Attorneys: For Ctoimanl(s): Scott E. Kresch - New York, NY For Respondent(s): Robert IWercado Jr. - Tarrytown, NY Robert Mercado, Jr. - Bronx, NY Date Filed: 07/14/1995 First Sctieduled: 02/27/1996 Decided: 02/27/1995 Case Summary: claimant employed respondent and provided him with a toan in the amount of $62,500. The promissory

Ly New York Stock Exchange NYSE In the Matter of Arbitration Between Case: Kenneth A. Ford v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Sm'itti Inc., dba Merrill Lynch, Tracy Krupntok and Michael Keene Attorneys: For Ctoin«nl(s): James C. Stewart Esq. - Rochester, NY For Fiespondenl(s): Walter Batoowski Esq. - New York, NY Date Filed: 08/07/1995 First Sctieduled: 11/21/1995 Decided: 3-4-1996 Case Summary: Claimant alleges tfie respondents misrepresented

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Gruntal & Co., Inc. vs. Craig Muir Attorneys: For ClainianKs): Douglas Jaffe, Esq. l-or Hespondenl(s): Craig Muir - Cahasset, MA - New York, N.Y. Date Filed: 07/10/1995 First Sctieduled: 02/22/1996 Case Summary: Claimant altoges breach of emptoyment agreement and non-payment of Product: PROMISSORY NOTE Decided: 7/11/96 promissory note. Market: Cla

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between / NYSE Case: Mldwood securities Inc., d/b/a/ Midwood Discount Brokerage vs. Edward Genast Attorneys: For Ctaiinant(s): John E. Lawtor Esq. - Garden City, NY Fbr Resoondentfs): I lark D. Carcliidi-Hyannis, I-^IA Date Filed: 07/10/95 First Sctieduled: 12/27/95 Decided: 2/26/96 Case Summary: claimant altoges debit batonce resulting from orders placed to sell, put and call

New York Stock Exchange In the Matter of Arbitration Between NYSE Case: Samuel L. Collins vs. The Advest Inc. and the Advest Group Inc. Attorneys: For Ctoimant(s): Frederick D. Greco Esq. - McLean, VA Scott Greco Esq. - McLean, VA Fbr Respondent(s): Stephanto Philips Bergman Esq. - Philadelphia, PA Gary A. Rosen Esq. - Philadelphto, PA Date Filed: 07/12/1995 First Sctieduled: 05/23/1996 Decided: 7/30/96 Case Summary: Claimant all

STIPULATED AWARD NASD Dispute Resolution In the Matter of the Arbitration Between Charles W. Leffew, Claimant, And Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc, 01-04472 Kirk J. Gill and John Simonson, Phoenix, Arizona Respondents Nature of the Dispute: Customer vs. Member and Associated Persons. REPRESENTATION OF PARTIES Charles W. Leffew was represented by David C. Anson, Esq. of Anson, Lammers and Barkley and Carl E. Hazlett, Esq. of Hazl