|
From: Robert Goehring, Attorney at Law
Pittsburgh, PA 15219 RE:SR-NASD-2006-088 Dear Ms. Morris: I am attorney in private practice who represents investors in NASD arbitrations. This is my thirty-sixth year of litigating and I have been involved in securities arbitration for the last ten. I have found that most Motions to Dismiss are frivolous but demand an extraordinary amount of time to respond to making arbitration more difficult and expensive for the ordinary investor. The specific problem with the MTDs is that they are generally filed prior to (and by rule responded to) documents being exchanged by the parties. Under SEC rule most respondents are required to keep and retain documents for six years. It is not until these documents are given to claimants that a full picture of the wrongdoing can be seen. A statement of claim that may have been inartfully drafted based on limited documents retained by claimants can be restated to satisfy statutes of limitations and other issues. A full hearing including the right to subpoena witnesses and documents is the ultimate incentive to produce. Arbitrators who are not experienced in litigation could be easily misled into issuing a dismissal prior to hearing that cannot be corrected. The harm to the arbitration process-one that has been thurst upon the investing public by the industry-is great. A full evidentary hearing is not only a goal but a necessity to protect the public.
Robert Goehring, Attorney at Law |