top of page

Representative Cases


Representing Buyers of Structured Products – Marcus v. UBS; Edelson v. UBS; Severi v. UBS – These investors had purchased so-called “Principal-Protected” investments from UBS, only to learn, too late, that these products had been issued by Lehman Brothers Holdings, and constituted the unsecured debt of that now-bankrupt company. Not only were these products mis-named and mis-marketed, but UBS failed to disclose to investors the extent of its (grave) concerns about Lehman’s viability. These cases were among the first decided that involved these new-fangled investments; the awards totaled nearly $1 million, and each investor was awarded full rescission and costs – remedies rarely seen in securities arbitration.
Representing Families -- McCarthy v. Neuberger Berman - The McCarthy family money (held individually and in trusts) was managed by Neuberger-Berman. The manager, however, invested the moneys in a risky portfolio. Neuberger's defense was that if one looked at the entire period of management (going back to 1982), the McCarthy family made millions (even including the millions lost between 2000 and 2002). Successfully asserting the existence of a fiduciary duty and a shorter "measuring period", the award was in excess of $1 million
Representing Widows -- Fitzgerald v. Citibank Investment Services - When Mr. Fitzgerald passed away, Mrs. Fitzgerald turned to the son of a friend - a broker at Citibank. That broker sold her an inappropriate variable annuity and a large quantum of in-house "B" share mutual funds. The annuity portion of the case brought Ms. Fitzgerald a full compensatory award of $45,000. 
Protecting the Elderly -- Hildegard Lash v. Prudential Securities - In 1994 and 1995, Deutsch & Lipner represented the Estate of Hildegard Lash. Mrs. Lash, a holocaust survivor, was fleeced by a family friend with the assistance of a broker/manager at Prudential. Thefts by the family friend (through the Prudential account) amounted to several hundred thousand dollars, and there were $200,000 in option-related losses. Despite the fact that the thefts and losses totaled only $600,000, the award was in excess of $1 million. Because Mrs. Lash had no surviving heirs, the award was used to fund the Hildegard Lash Foundation, which, inter alia awards college scholarship to parentless youth.
Representing Executives and Businesspeople -- Weingarten v. Merrill Lynch - in 2001 and 2002, Deutsch & Lipner represented Robert Weingarten, a former senior vice president of Exodus Communications. Mr. Weingarten had received millions of dollars in Exodus employee stock stock options (ISOs and NQOs), but had received horrible advice from a young, aggressive Merrill broker as to how to deal with them. After a 4-day arbitration, the Weingartens were awarded $3 million, the first such award involving employee stock options.
Representing Employees -- WorldCom optionees and UPS shareowners- Beginning in 2002, Deutsch & Lipner represented over twenty individuals who were employed by MCI/Worldcom or its predecessors. These individuals had been granted employee-stock options, but then received negligent and conflicted advice from Salomon Smith Barney.

In 2005, Deutsch & Lipner began representing UPS employees and former employees who held large blocks of UPS stock. These UPS employees were persuaded by brokers from various firms, including Merrill Lynch and MSDW, to engage in a strategy involving the sale of options. When UPS stock rose, those short option positions became very large, and the employees were required to buy them back at very high prices or surrender their valuable shares at less-than-market prices. In Weyrauch v. Merrill Lynch - the first such case to go to arbitration, the award was over $900,000, plus attorneys fees.
Representing Foreign Investors - Marshall Realty v. MSDW- In 2003 and 2004, Deutsch & Lipner represented this Singapore entity in a claim against Morgan Stanley. Marshall Realty was the family-investment vehicle of a wealthy merchant family in Singapore. The family's representative was trained as a barrister at the Middle Temple, and had been a successful international businessman. Unfamiliar with U.S. stocks, he invested at the recommendation of a Singapore office of Morgan Stanley. Despite his education and the past experience of its principal, the award to Marshall Realty was several hundred thousand dollars. 


Nifly v. JP Morgan - In 2012, Deutsch & Lipner represented a wealthy foreign investment company against JP Morgan for failure properly to execute a trade instruction. Digging deep into JP Morgan's internal e-mails and records, Deutsch & Lipner proved that JP Morgan were unable to locate identifying information about our client's security's holdings. The investor received an award representing lost profits on a trade that JP Morgan negligently failed to execute.
Representing Wealthy Investors with Foreign Investments - Transamerica v. Lehman Brothers-In 1999 and 2000, Deutsch & Lipner represented a very wealthy, high-profile, experienced and knowledgeable individual who invested in a derivative sold by Lehman Brothers. The derivative was a complex instrument based on an obscure Russian bond issued by the Ministry of Finance. Despite the investor's sophistication and wealth, the arbitrators awarded a substantial sum.



bottom of page