Home Firm Overview Practice Areas Staff In The News Publications Public Service Contact Us
Telephone: (212) 679-6000
Fax: (212) 759-3122
Practice Areas

Investment Arbitration Cases - Investment Litigation Cases

Representative Cases Clients Rights
Office Locations Web Resources


In the Matter of the Arbitration between Engel et al. v. Refco, Inc., et al
746 N.Y.S. 2d 826 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty 2002):

In 2001 our Firm obtained record-setting arbitration decisions and won an initial recovery for investors totaling over $42 million from Refco Inc., which was then one of the world’s largest futures commission merchants (FCM) - commodities brokerages. The National Futures Association panel of arbitrators determined that Refco "violated the fraud provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act." After losing an appeal to a state court judge in New York City, Refco was responsible for paying over $46 million, including punitive damages to some of the clients, and additional interest. Every one of our clients in the case received full payment of their respective awards.

Supreme Court McMahon Shearson/American Express

Shearson / American Express, Inc. v. McMahon,
482 U.S. 220 (1987)

McMahon is the landmark case we handled for our investor clients on appeal to the Second Circuit [federal] Court of Appeals in New York – and afterwards argued all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.  The case established arbitration as the vehicle for securities investors to arbitrate their statutory fraud claims and other disputes with the brokerage industry pursuant to pre-dispute arbitration agreements. In the years following the McMahon decision, our Firm testified before two Congressional subcommittees, assisted in drafting securities arbitration reform legislation and worked diligently on behalf of all investors in order to level the playing field in securities arbitration. Our track record includes obtaining numerous large settlements for our clients and winning an historic commodities fraud arbitration against Refco, Inc.

Engel et al. v. Refco Inc., 97ARB157
(National Futures Association 2001):

These are the underlying decisions in the Refco case. To View the Decisions Click on: http://www.nfa.futures.org.; Then go to Broker/Firm Information (BASIC); Click on: Advanced Search; Go to: Search by Individual Name; Type in at Last Name: Goldinger; Click on: Goldinger; Go to: NFA Arbitration Awards; Click on: Details; Go to: 97ARB157; Click on: Details. This was a consolidation of thirteen separate investor cases in the largest commodities fraud case to have been arbitrated at the NFA:
Amato v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Blumenfeld v. Refco, LLC , et al.
Bushnell v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Crosby v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Dieckhaus v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Dominguez v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Elliott v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Herst Ventures, Inc. v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Imhof v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Jack Engel and Ilene Engel, Co-Trustees of the Engel Family Trust U/T/A Dated December 16, 1970 v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Krickl v. Refco, LLC, et al.
Rosett v. Refco, LLC, et al.
XBD Claims Management Co., LLC, et al. v. Refco, LLC, et al.

Refco LLC v. Dieckhaus, et al., No. 01 C 6480, slip op.
(N.D. Ill. Nov. 13, 2001):

This case was brought by Refco after it lost the arbitration in which a group of 13 of our clients won an arbitration award of over $42 million.  The federal judge in Illinois dismissed the case and granted our clients relief after we argued that Refco’s appeal of the arbitrator’s decision should be heard in New York, in the vicinity where most of the arbitration trial actually took place.

Sioufi v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith,
Wall St. J., June 8, 1994, at C6 1994:

One of our string of successful cases for our international clients, this multi-national businessman as reported by the New York Times set a record in the mid-1990's for the largest settlement in a case venued at the NYSE at over $5 million.

Cowen & Co. v. Anderson, 76 N.Y. 2d 318 (1990):

In the highest court in New York we won in the right of our client to arbitrate his brokerage fraud case at the American Arbitration Association, a forum independent of the brokerage industry’s self-regulatory organizations such as the NASD and NYSE. At the time, the SEC supported the public investors’ right to arbitrate at an independent forum.

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith v. Driessens,
10/24/96 N.Y.L.J. 27, (col. 5) (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty):

We won the right for our investor client, a retired furniture manufacturer from Belgium, to arbitrate his claims of punitive damages at an NASD arbitration in New York City.  After the decision the case was settled favorably for our client.

Back To Top

Home | Firm Overview | Practice Areas | Staff | Representative Cases | Representative Clients | International Investors | In The News
Publications | Public Service | Statement of Clients' Rights | Investor Web Resources | Disclaimer | Office Locations | Site Map
Contact Us

Practice Areas:
Civil Litigation | Investment Fraud | Securities Fraud | Securities Industry Employment Law
International Investment Fraud | Commercial & Business Litigation

48 Wall Street, Suite 1100 New York, New York 10005
Telephone: (212) 679-6000
Fax: (212) 759-3122

Copyright © 2003-2007 All Rights Reserved.
Eppenstein and Eppenstein | Attorneys at Law