<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>UPDATE: 2026-10 AWARDS</title>
    <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss</link>
    <description>Powered by ARBChek</description>
    <copyright>2026 Securities Arbitration Commentator, Inc. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 16:25:09 -0400</pubDate>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Carodine v. Edward D Jones, FINRA ID #25-02578 (Birmingham, AL, 2026-05-26)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02578</link>
      <description>A Panel unanimously awards a broker's request for expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD record.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Whitehurst v. Merrill Lynch, FINRA ID #25-02022 (Los Angeles, CA, 2026-05-20)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02022</link>
      <description>A broker loses his request for reformation of alleged defamatory information from his Form U5 record.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Peterson v. Northwestern Mutual, FINRA ID #25-02073 (San Francisco, CA, 2026-05-18)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02073</link>
      <description>A broker is awarded his request for expungement of a customer complaint from his CRD record by unanimous decision of the Panel despite the objection of the authorized representative of the state securities regulator for California.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Connolly v. SunAmerica Capital, FINRA ID #26-00134 (Los Angeles, CA, 2026-05-26)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-26-00134</link>
      <description>A Panel unanimously grants Respondent broker-dealer's Pre-Hearing Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FINRA Rule 13206 (Six-year Eligibility Rule for Industry Disputes) after finding that the claims giving rise to this case, as well as the filing of the registered representative's Form U5 record, took place in December 2012, thus making them ineligible for arbitration.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Egei v. Forge Securities, FINRA ID #25-02752 (Washington, DC, 2026-05-21)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02752</link>
      <description>In this small claims arbitration, a customer alleging that based on representations that were made by Respondent broker-dealer he invested in a private fund managed by Forge Global Advisors called FUND FG-SHE loses his case.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Ledford v. Commonwealth Financial, FINRA ID #25-01973 (Orlando, FL, 2026-05-20)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-01973</link>
      <description>A Panel unanimously denies with prejudice a broker's request for expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD record.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Cardella v. Northwestern Mutual, FINRA ID #25-02204 (Jacksonville, FL, 2026-05-21)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02204</link>
      <description>A broker loses his request for expungement of two customer complaints from appearing on his CRD record, with prejudice, by unanimous decision of the Panel and after a contested hearing on the expungement by one named Respondent broker-dealer.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Parenti v. Fidelity Brokerage, FINRA ID #25-01974 (Atlanta, GA, 2026-05-21)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-01974</link>
      <description>In this small claims arbitration, a customer alleging that due to inaccurate and misleading market data contained on Respondent broker-dealer's Active Trader Pro desktop platform, he placed a limit sell order on his investment in Envirotech Vehicles Inc., to his detriment, loses his case.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Feng v. Robinhood Financial, FINRA ID #25-02043 (Chicago, IL, 2026-05-20)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02043</link>
      <description>A customer alleging that he experienced severe financial and emotional harm due to unauthorized transactions that took place in this account with Respondent broker-dealer is awarded compensatory damages.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Altobelli v. Merrill Lynch, FINRA ID #25-02271 (Chicago, IL, 2026-05-19)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02271</link>
      <description>A Panel unanimously grants Claimant broker's request for expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD record finding said complaint to be factually impossible and false under FINRA Rule 2080.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Wolfrum v. Sanctuary Securities, FINRA ID #25-01929 (Indianapolis, IN, 2026-05-28)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-01929</link>
      <description>A Registered Rep is awarded expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD record after the Panel found he was not involved with the alleged investment-related sales practice violation under FINRA Rule 2080 and despite the objection of the authorized representative of the state securities regulator for Indiana.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Levy v. Fidelity Brokerage, FINRA ID #25-02587 (New Orleans, LA, 2026-05-26)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02587</link>
      <description>In this small claims arbitration, a customer alleging that a drop in the value of his investment account occurred as a result of an accounting error and that he was overcharged for his investment in Nvidia Corporation options loses his case.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Breard v. LPL Financial, FINRA ID #25-01889 (New Orleans, LA, 2026-05-18)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-01889</link>
      <description>Registered Rep is granted his request for expungement of two customer complaints from his CRD record by unanimous decision of the Panel.  The customer's complaints involved the purchase of real estate investment trusts.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Carter v. NYLife Securities, FINRA ID #25-00898 (Detroit, MI, 2026-05-21)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-00898</link>
      <description>After settling all his claims in this matter, a Panel grants Claimant broker's remaining request for expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD record.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Quqa v. Edward Jones, FINRA ID #25-02785 (Raleigh, NC, 2026-05-21)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02785</link>
      <description>A Panel grants a registered representative's request for expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD record after finding said complaint to be factually impossible, clearly erroneous, and false.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Raho v. UBS Financial, FINRA ID #25-02763 (Jersey City, NJ, 2026-05-21)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-02763</link>
      <description>A broker loses his request for expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD records with prejudice by unanimous decision of the Panel and after the objection of said customer involved.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>White v. David Lerner, FINRA ID #25-01773 (Jersey City, NJ, 2026-05-18)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-01773</link>
      <description>An All-Public Panel grants Respondent broker-dealer's Pre-Hearing Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FINRA Rule 12206 of the Code (Six-year Eligibility Rule) after finding that the event or occurrence giving rise to the case took place nearly ten (10) years prior to the filing of the Statement of Claim and is therefore ineligible for arbitration.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Greenman v. Equitable Advisors, FINRA ID #25-01558 (New York, NY, 2026-05-28)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-01558</link>
      <description>Despite denying Respondent broker-dealer's Pre-Hearing Motion to Dismiss, a Panel unanimously denies, with prejudice, a registered representative's requests for expungement of a customer complaint from appearing on his CRD record and for reformation of the Reason for Termination from his Form U5 record.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Rimmel v. UBS Financial, FINRA ID #26-00474 (Pittsburgh, PA, 2026-05-22)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-26-00474</link>
      <description>A Panel provides factual background and awards Claimant broker his request for expungement of a customer complaint from his CRD record after unanimously finding said complaint to be factually impossible and false under FINRA Rule 2080.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>
        <value>Jerome-Surendran v. E*Trade, FINRA ID #25-01541 (Salt Lake City, UT, 2026-05-29)</value>
      </title>
      <link>http://www.arbchek.com/updatearbchek.html?utm_source=organic&amp;utm_medium=rss#ua-25-01541</link>
      <description>An investor alleging that Respondent broker-dealer failed to act in his best interest when it recommended the securities purchases for his account and committed fraud with respect to his account loses his case.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
