Customer Not Beneficiary of Clearing Agreement
Hossain vs. Rauscher Pierce Refsnes
Hossain v. Rauscher Pierce Refsnes, Inc., Case No. 97-1380 (D. Kan., 5/15/00): A customer of an introducing broker is not a third party beneficiary of a clearing agreement between an introducing and clearing broker.
Hossain claimed to be a third-party beneficiary of an agreement between Primeline, a broker-dealer which employed Asif Amenn as a registered representative, and the Defendants.
Amenn, operating a Ponzi scheme, stole money from Plaintiff and was eventually convicted of securities fraud. The Court held, if Plaintiff relied on the clearing agreement to his detriment, it was without liability to Rauscher. In this case, there was no intent to benefit third parties and the agreement states it is not intended to benefit anyone other than the contracting parties. (P. Hoblin) (SAC Ref. No 2000-20-009)
Copyright 2000-2002 Securities Arbitration Commentator, Inc. P.O. Box 112, Maplewood, NJ 07040; t: 973-761-5880 f: 973-761-1504. Materials denoted with a SAC Reference No. (e.g. SAC Ref. No. 99-01-001) are on hand at SAC and may be obtained by calling the Securities Arbitration Commentator, or by email to email@example.com. The Securities Arbitration Commentator is the leading publication for securities arbitration news and information, and maintains the most complete database of arbitration awards availalble anywhere. For more information regarding their services, visit their website at www.sacarbitration.com
Need help with a securities law issue? Call New York Securities Lawyer at 212-509-6544 or visit the website. Representing investors and advisers across the country for over 30 years.