Milliner

Milliner v. Bock

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 11, 20203:20-cv-01564California3,698 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

BACKGROUND

23 In December 2014 Petitioner filed a statement of claim with FINRA against Respondents, 24 Mutual Securities, Inc. (“MSI”), and Bock Evans Financial Counsel, Ltd. (“BEFC”).3 (Dkt. No. 25

26 1 Record citations are to material in the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pinpoint citations are to the ECF-generated page numbers at the top of the documents. 27 2 All parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1 1-1 at 2.) Petitioner alleged that Respondents, as licensed and registered principals of MSI, a 2 broker-dealer registered with FINRA, violated federal law and state law and FINRA rules in 3 managing an investment account funded by Petitioner’s retirement savings.4 (Dkt. No. 1-1 at 2-3.) 4 Petitioner asserted multiple claims and sought over $3 million in compensatory damages. (Id. at 5 3.) Petitioner served her statement of claim on Respondents in January 2015. (Dkt. No. 13-1, Ex. 6 A at 2.) Respondents, as FINRA-regulated financial advisors, agreed to submit to FINRA 7 arbitration in February 2015. (Dkt. Nos. 1 at ¶ 9 & 10 at 6-7; see also Dkt. No. 1-3, Ex. 3.) The 8 FINRA Arbitration Submission…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.