NASD DISPUTE RESOLUTION AWARD NASD DISPUTE RESOLUTION. INC. CASE: 01-03383 Sam Hitner, Claimant vs. Hornblower & Weeks, Inc., Anthony Johnson, Gary J. Ferrera and Stephen M Magee, Respondents. ATTORNEYS: Claimant, Sam Hitner, ("Claimant"), appeared Pro Se., Boca Raton, FL. Respondents, Anthony Johnson, Stephen Magee and Gary Ferrera, (collectively "Respondent"), appeared Pro Se., New York, NY. For Respondent, Hornblower & Weeks, Inc., ("Respondent")

:ASE: AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN BURNER CREW V. KEMPER SECURITIES GROUP, INC. 3ATE FILED: ZASE SUMMARY! 4/26/93 FIRST SCHEDULED 10/25 &26/93 DECIDED 10/17/94 lanaloyee vs. eirployer dispute. Claimant alleges race discrimination in violation of Title VII, malicious prosecution, defamation; and tortious interference by brokerage firm. Respondent denies'all claims and counteirclaims against Claimant for con

SE: AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN ALLAN & BONNIE COHEN V. SMITH BARNEY SHEARSON Cla^lCii. ^ ^^-OU DATE FILED: 7/18/94 FIRST SCHEDULED 10/10/94 DECIDED 4k^CASE SUMMARY:* Customer v. member claim. Claimants allege that Smith Barney mishandled their account in connection with th e s< £fle of Parker and Paisley Petroleum Company common stock. Respondent denies the charge. CLAIMANT SESSIONS

AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN THOMAS ANDREW O'KEEFE V. SHEARSON LEHMAM BROTHTERS, IMC• DATE FILED: 2/10/94 FIRST SCHEDUX.ED 5/12/94 DECIDED 5/12/94 CASE SUMMARY:• Customer y. Member dispute involving the purchase of Americus Trust for Amoco Shares Score Components. Claimant alleqes misrepresentation, negligence & failure to comply with customer's investment objectives. CLAIMANT'S IHZTIAI.S SESSIONS

AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE uuunflwi o atvitja ..x*x«* IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN HER REQUEST. CLAIMANT V. TUCKER ANTHONY & R. L. DAY, INC. P.asjL < d. ^ (\4'03 DATE FILTD: 5/29/92 FIRST SCHEDULED 12/15 & Ifi,TQQ^DECIDED 5lS/9^ CASE SUMMARY:* Employee/Employer dispute involving aae. sexual harassment/ sex discrimination. Claimant further alleges wrongful di^chajpae and breach Of written emplovitient conttact^/.r>   i - t ^ .

tXCAM STOCK EXCKAMOE ZM THE MATTER OF ASBZTRATXOH BETWEEN CASE: DUNN NEWFUMD I. LTP. ittiP PC»W MEWFOND tl, IgP. V. MCMHHAN * CCMPJWY V. POMW CCMMOOITIES, INC. DATE FILED: CASE SUMMARYt FIRST BCKEDULED 12/6/89 DECIDED */i^/9* r. Mewbar djLspwfts. progeaaie«>al anaqas \o have a slfle ClaHaants, •uboapainatea lendwr ami OB»-«**^-f^r with a Jaroksr/dsalar tor lAguiaitV whl^i WB not aaheraJ teo. CLAIMANT'S ZHZTXALS- _ SESSIONS: 2

AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATXON BETWEEN iSE: HOWARD LASHER & THE LASHER GROUP, INC., V. NICHOLAS LIVERANI ^TE PILED: ^SE SUMMARY:< 8/3/93 FIRST SCHEDULED 11/29/93 DECIDED 2/23/94 A MEMBER V. MEMBER EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE DISPUTE INVOLVING THE UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASE OF FRUIT O'F THE LOOM SHARES. CLAIMANT FURTHER ALLEQES TRANSFER FEE AND OTHER DEBTS ARE OUTSTANDING. :LAIMANT'S INITIALS »E IONS: • "• 1 ^ RESPONDEN

':ASE : AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN MICHAEL DENNIS GARDNER V. RAS SECURITIES CORPORATION, ROBERT GOSS & EDWARD BORELLI il DATE FILED: 9/20/93 ^3-"   ^ ^ FIRST SCHEDULED 11/3/93 DECIDED 12/10/93 CASE SUMMARY:* Customer v. member claim. Claimant alleges that broker breachc CLAIMANT'S INITIALS RESPONDENT'S SESSIONS: DECISION BASED ON PLEADINGS. their agreement to enter a Airlines

CASE: AMERICAN &TOCK EXCHANcis IN THB HATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN LESLIE E. ELLISSON V. MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH, INC, ARETI KITSIOS n.a^ < ^ ^ ^3' tn DATE FILED: 8/4/93 FIRST SCHEDULED 11/3/93 DECIDED 12/10/93 CASE SUMMARY:* Customer v. member claim. Claimant alleges broker forced him to sell IBM and CWE options and that he lost money as a result CLAIMANT'S INITIALS RBSPONDBNT'8 SESSIONS: DECISION BASED ON

AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE HATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN CASE : VICTOR & JANE HAENTZE V. SHEARSON LEHMAN BROTHERS & PAUL D. BLASBTTI a^i^ ^z^ ^ ^3' ^o DATE FILED: 9/10/92 FIRST SCHEDULED 2/19/93 DECIDED 12/ln/QT ^.r.,=. .^..»»..>».. Customer v. member arbitration. Claimant alleges fraud, breach CASE SUMMARY S • ^ __ of contract, failure to supervise, unauthorized tradincr by the firm and broker. The firm argues that claimant authorized all