From: Lenny Steiner [lensteiner@msn.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2003 3:04 AM
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
Subject: SR-NASD-98-74; Proposed Amendment to Rule 3110(f)

I write to urge rejection of the proposed Rule 3110 which would permit 
brokerages to insert a binding choice of law provision in arbitration 
agreements.  The rule would greatly injure customers.  One need only 
look at the fact that until the US Supreme Court decision in Mastrobuono, 
brokerages always asserted in arbitrations, no matter where held, that NY 
law governed and that NY law did not permit awards of punitive damages in 
arbitrations.  Wall Street's influence is far greater in NY than in any 
other jurisdiction, save possibly DC.  Is it any wonder that brokerages 
want NY law to govern?

As it is, customers cannot open an account without waiving their right to 
trial by jury or by even an impartial arbitration association, such as 
the AAA.  It is only logical that the law that should apply is the one 
where the customer resides and where the transactions occurred.  Why a CA 
broker handling a CA customer should be able to compel the application of 
NY law is beyond comprehension.

Wall Street's ability and willingness to rip off their customers and the 
public in general has never been more glaringly in the news than in the past 
two years.  Customers need more protection, not less.  Please reject this 
patently improper attempt to further prevent customers from having their 
claims fairly adjudicated.  

Thank you.

Leonard Steiner
433 N. Camden Drive, Suite 730
Beverly Hills, CA  90210
310/273-7778