This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Torts
Defamation
Tortious Interference With Business Relations

C. Eric Buonassisi v. UBS Financial Services Inc., Mitchell Scott Condit Ackerman, Loren Shay Neumann, Kathryn Nanette Stone

Published: Sep. 13, 2008 | Result Date: Apr. 28, 2008 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 07-00911 Arbitration –  Award in favor of UBS

Court

Arbitration Forum


Attorneys

Claimant

Patrick J. Burns Jr.


Respondent

Benjamin W. White

Lisa M. Bertain
(Keesal, Young & Logan)


Facts

Claimant C. Eric Buonassisi sued respondents UBS Financial Services, Mitchell Ackerman, Loren Neumann and Kathryn Stone alleging tortious interference with business relations, defamation and libel. Claimant also sought expungement of his CRD records. Respondent denied the allegations and asserted various affirmative defenses. Respondent requested that the claims be dismissed and that it be awarded costs and any other appropriate relief.

Damages

Claimant sought compensatory damages of $5,000,000 and expungement of his CRD records.

Result

The Panel denied the claims against UBS in their entirety.

Other Information

On Nov. 15, 2007, claimant dismissed respondents Ackerman, Neumann and Stone. On March 21, 2008, UBS filed a motion to dismiss the claims as barred as a matter of law based upon absolute privilege. The panel issued an order on April 17, 2008 finding claimant showed no likelihood of success on his defamation and interference with business relations causes of action due to the New York Stock Exchange's findings as to claimant's actions in his wife's account. Further, UBS was entitled to absolute or qualified privilege in filing the U-5 because claimant failed to provide any support to the contrary and respondents' statements were not intentional, malicious, or intended to injure claimant's reputation. It would also be unfair to require UBS to participate in a hearing where claimant would unlikely produce any clear and convincing evidence that respondents' statements were materially false or made in reckless disregard of the truth. ARBITRATORS: Herbert Schwartz, Collen C. Hammer, Timothy P. Bogan, CPA.


#107879

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390