Lehman Brothers Loses Another FINRA Promissory Note Collection Case

May 7, 2012

LONDON, ENGLAND - SEPTEMBER 24:  Two employees...

I have not hid it or made any bones about it. I don't like the collection effort made by Lehman Brothers against its former employees - theoretically, I understand the legal obligation for the assignee holding company to pursue the balances on outstanding promissory notes and I also appreciate the anger of many devastated investors. On the other hand, victimizing some victims and trying to make two wrongs into one right just doesn't work for me. For many former employees of Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Smith Barney, Wachovia, and other firms, I feel the same compassion. You don't have to agree; but I am letting you know, upfront, my bias.

For more insights, read these "Street Sweeper" columns:

Case In Point

In a Financial industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA") ArbitrationStatement of Claim filed in October 2010, Claimant Lehman Brothers asserted against Respondent St. Jean a cause of action for breach of contract based upon allegation of monies owed on a promissory note. Claimant sought $192,857.14 plus interest, costs, attorneys' fee, and other fees. In the Matter of the FINRA Arbitration Between Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., as assignee of Lehman Brothers Inc., Claimant, vs. Jeremy St. Jean, Respondent (FINRA Arbitration 10-04599, May 2, 2012).

Respondent St. Jean generally denied the allegations and asserted various affirmative defenses.

After considering the pleadings, the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, and the post-hearing submissions, the sole FINRA Arbitrator dismissed Claimant Lehman Brothers' claims in their entirety.

Short, sweet, and to the point!  Bravo!!