January 23, 2016
Sometimes it's simply a misunderstanding: You didn't think that you had to disclose to your employer brokerage firm that you were serving as a director or officer of a company. Sometimes it's not a misunderstanding and, for whatever reason, you opted to hide your outside activity from your employer. Then again, sometimes you get caught and sometimes you don't. Frankly, I really don't give a damn if you get away with it because as a lawyer, I can't charge you an exorbitant retainer and astronomical hourly fees if you managed to avoid detection. As to those of you who got nailed by your employer and/or FINRA, how much justice can you afford? READ
What if the guy graduated from the prestigious university that he said he had?
What if the investment he was touting was what he said it was?
What if the profits that he referenced had actually occurred?
What if the promised check in the mail had been written or even put in the mail?
What if a much of a which of a wind gives the truth to summer's lie?
Pro Se Respondent Battles SEC Bar To Standstill
Today's BrokeAndBroker.com Blog considers a fascinating Securities and Exchange Commission regulatory case that began with a State of New Hampshire Consent Order, which barred an individual respondent. Frankly, that should have been the end of this legal saga because the normal, typical, garden-variety follow-up is for the SEC to tack on a federal Bar. The thing is, however, that the BrokeAndBroker.com Blog seeks out the oddball and the quirky. Welcome to another sampling from that menu. READ
Stockbroker, Compliance, Legal, and Regulatory Jobs
search by title, skills, job, city, state, zip, and company
NOTICE TO EMPLOYERS: BrokeAndBroker.com offers the perfect Wall Street demographic of stockbrokers, advisors, lawyers, regulators, compliance, and back-office personnel
Click POST A JOB and your position will be promptly listed.
Only $50 for 30 days!
BrokeAndBroker.com Blog is pleased to refer our readers to: