In a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA") Arbitration Statement of Claim filed in August 2011, Claimant Wojnowski, Jr.  alleged wrongful termination; fraud in the inducement; and breach of contract in connection with his employment relationship with Respondents. Claimant ultimately sought compensatory damages between $4,276,665.00 and $5,851,665.00.  In the Matter of the FINRA arbitration Between Donald Anthony Wojnowski, Jr., Claimant v. & Strudwick, Incorporated, Gordon Lee Crenshaw, II, Donald Hale Newlin, and Milton Turner, Respondents; and James Todd Newton, Third-Party Respondent(FINRA Arbitration 11-03029, January 23, 2013)

Respondents generally denied the allegations; asserted various affirmative defenses and filed a:

• Counterclaim asserting breach of loans; and
• Third Party Claim asserting breach of fiduciary duty and gross negligence in connection with Third-Party Respondent Newton's employment relationships with the Respondents.

Ameriprise Wins Employee Promissory Note CaseBill SingerContributor

Tullet Prebon's $16 Million Raiding Case Broadside Against BGC Financial FizzlesBill SingerContributor

Stockbroker Wins Arbitration For Owed Commissions And ExpensesBill SingerContributor

Morgan Stanley Wins Unfair Competition And Raiding Case Against Robert W. BairdBill SingerContributor

In their Counterclaim, Respondents ultimately sought between $100,000 and and $130,000 in compensatory damages; and in their Third-Party Claim, between $100,000 and $300,000 in compensatory damages.

Third-Party Respondent Newton generally denied the allegations asserted various affirmative defenses, and Counterclaimed for breach of employment agreement. In his Counterclaim, Third-Party Respondent ultimately sought $2,330,000 in compensatory damages.

Award

The FINRA Arbitration Panel found Respondent Anderson & Strudwick liable and ordered it to pay to

• Claimant: $80,000.00 in compensatory damages plus $600 in filing fees
• Third-Party Claimant: $140,000.00 in compensatory damages plus $375 in filing fees.

Bill Singer's Comment

A head scratcher of an Award. I mean, geez, you got a Claimant seeking between $4 million and $6 million in damages but winds up with $80,000; however, the Third-Party Claimant, who apparently was just sittin' on the sidelines mindin' his own business, decides, what the hell, and asks for about $2 million in damages and he gets $140,000. When you got a Third-Party Claimant taking home more damages than the Claimant that's an oddball outcome.

How do you handicap this case?  Hey, take your best shot.  The Respondents were looking at about $8 million in exposure but walked away from the hearings with a tab for about $220,000.  Could this case have settled in 2011 or 2012 - should this case have settled a year or two earlier? I'm sure that there is a whole hell of a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on over this one - but notwithstanding how you may have called the plays for this game, the case ended with far more fizzle than sizzle for Claimant.