AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN -:.. WILLIAM & FLORENCE O'CONNOR V. PRUDENTIAL-BACHES SECURITIES INC. (r!n,cit-nmpr .gma 1 1—C-laJms CiJapUl-e) ^< ^0-IO ;.TE FILED: June 1. 1989 FIRST SCHEDULED May 24. 19 90 DECIDED May 24 1990 .SE SUMMARY: * Cystomer v. member stock certificate! diapiii-f»- r-lj^jpiflnt allggeP that member firm Respondent placed an unauthorjaj^d "stpp" op thejr stock certificate and forgery. AIMANT'S INI

AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN 5.SE: CHARLES BENWITT V. BRIAR SECURITIES, INC. \TE FILED! Aug 4, 1989 ^^^^^ SCHEDULED March 26, 1990 QECIDED May 15, 1990 \SE SUMMARY:* Member v. Member p dispute. claimant member alleges that Respondent member firm refused to pay a fine ..AIMANT'S INITIALS 1&2 3IONS: .AIM AND AWARD DATA: -AIM S15fOOP.00 N/A JNITIVE rTY FEES Requested r

IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN 22. BEAR, STEARNS & CO., INC., V. HIGHLAND SECURITIES CO., S HYMAN MULLER & HARRY MULLER ^^O'O^ -E FILED: Sept 29, 1989 ^iHtST SCHEDULED Feb 7, 1990 QECIDED May 7, 1990 3E SUMMARY:* Member v. Member specialist joint account agreement: dispute. Claimant alleges Respondents failed to pay to claimant $450,000, Of a total $500,000, purchase price for an intrest in Household and Rorer options. , •

AMERICAN STOCK IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRAT. ^TWEEN MICHAEL WOLFF V. COWEN & CO. ~* ^0 -on wTE FILED: 7/27/88 FIRST SCHEDULED >i/37/9o DECIDED '1 /:;"/ / 9 0 iSE SUMMARY:* Customer v. member small claims dispute. Claimant allegea Respondent member firm effected an options trade which resulted ir. a. debit balance. Respondent member firm has asserted a counterclaim in its answer. ..AIMANT'S INITIALS SSSIONS: ^ v d

AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OP ARBITRATION BETWEEN CASE; HOWARD L. SCHEINER V. ADVEST, INC. *^0-0(ff DATE FILED: June 15. 1989 ^1^3^ SCHEDULED April 6, 1990 DECIDED April 6, 199 CASE SUMMARY: * rnpilrimpr v. member, dispute. Claimant allogco unaufehojlsed sale of shares by respondent member firm to aatiapy a itia-pg-jn rJ^TI CLAIMANT'S INITIALS SESSIONS: 1 a 2 RESPONDENT'S THIRD PARTY'S INITIALS CLAIM AND AWARD DATA: Return

Aivit-.-i:: :.,M. ...•r..^c.ii IN THE MATTt f. ARBITRATli BETWEEN :ASE : Edna Lavey v. Spear Leeds & Kellogg/Investors Co. v. PaineWebber v. CRT Options V. O'Connor & Associates v. Z-Ilchael Schwartz ^ '^O 'O^ 3ATE FILED: 7/14/RR. FIRST SCHEDULED ^/^/^^ DECIDED .;ASE SUMMARY: * Market crash case. Claimant alleges 6 optiona tirades were unfairIv executed by the specialist. ZLAIMANT'S INITIALS SESSIONS; 1-6 RESPONDE

Award NASD Dispute Resolution In the Matter of the Arbitration Between: Diane P. Ferlauto, Diane P. Ferlauto Family Trust Dated 4/27/00, and Diane P. Ferlauto IRA, Claimants v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., Respondent Case Number: 01-03369 Hearing Site: Los Angeles, California REPRESENTATION OF PARTIES For Claimants: Philip M. Aidikoff, Esq. Keith Fraser, Esq. Aidikoff&Uhl Beverly Hills, California For Respondent: Peter Brown D

AMERlCAit STOC:-. IN THE MATTER OF ARBI ;ASE : JOHN D. STULIGROSS v. ROSE & CO. -i^... iJ ETWEEN (Charles Schwab s, Co. successor-in- interest to Rose & Co.) i^'^C'CH )ATE FILED: July 7. 1989 FIRST SCHEDULED March 19, 1990 DECIDED March 19. 199 !ASE SUMMARY: * Cugtomer v. apall claima manbar dispute. Claimant alleges untimely delay In receiving verbal and written oonfirmatjon of an options assignment. :LAIMANT'S INITI

ASE: AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS, UPHAM & CO., INC., V. YASUKI TATEISHI & TATBISHI & CO., INC. ATE FILED: Oct 6, 1988 FIRST SCHEDULED Dec 19, 1989 DECIDED Dec 19, 1989 ASE SUMMARY-* Member v. Customer transaction dispute. Member firm Claimant alleges that Respondent customer and customer's corporation effected trades on margin which resulted In an unsecured debit balance. Member firm Claimant is

AMERICA J3TOMER SML. CLAIMS ' jjj THE MATTER CHANGE ri'ON «STWEBN ASE: THBLMA G. PINKEL V. SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON INC, ^^'?-2.2_ lATE FILED: s,p4- T QPH FIRST SCHEDULED Aug. 14.1989 DECIDED Dec 4. 1989 'ASE SUHMARY:• Customer Small Claim v. member bond dispute. claimant alleges misrepre.3entation and failure by broker to follow her Instruction.^. Respondent meniber firm is requesting aittorney fees. ILAIMANT'S INITIALS SESSIONS: *1