September 20, 2005
Goodman & Nekvasil, P.A.
14020 Roosevelt Blvd., Suite 808
Clearwater, Florida 33762
727-524-8486
September 20, 2005
Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F. Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20549
Re Comments to Proposed NASD Rule 10308 and NYSE Rule 607
Dear Secretary Katz:
This letter represents the views of four attorneys, all of whom limit their practice to the representation of investors in arbitration of disputes against the brokerage industry. We unanimously submit this comment on proposed NASD Rule 10308 and NYSE Rule 607 --- SR- NASD-2005-094, Public Arbitrator Definition.
We strongly disagree with the proposal that would allow for the inclusion as a public arbitrator of any attorney or other professional whose firm has represented industry members within the prior five years. To the contrary, those very persons are intimately connected to the securities industry and therefore must be excuded from the defintion of a public arbitrator.
Arbitration is surely a poor substitute for court litigation when the so-called deck is stacked with industry affiliated arbitrators. One of the primary roles of the SEC and the regulators is protection of the public. That function is seriously undermined when arbitration panels are filled with industry arbitrators who are professionally and intimately tied to brokerage firms. Having one industry so-called non-public arbitrator on a panel is bad enough. But when a second panelist who is intimately tied to the industry is added, then fairness no longer is a standard -- rather it is a cruel illusion.
We oppose the stacked deck that would be created under the proposed rule. Instead the definition of public arbitrator should be modified to specifically exclude from the term any attorney, accountant or other professional whose firm has represented industry members within the prior five years.
Sincerely,
Goodman & Nekvasil, P.A.
Joel A. Goodman, Esq.
Kalju Nekvasil, Esq.
Stephen Krosschell,Esq.
Jennifer Newsom, Esq.