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.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Common Count for Money Lent

Barclays Capital Inc. v. Watt Wetmore Webb

Published: Jan. 16, 2016 | Result Date: Dec. 13, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 14-01677 Arbitration –  $1,377,860

Court

FINRA


Attorneys

Claimant

Devin A. Donohue
(Lombardi & Donohue LLP)


Respondent

Eric M. Epstein
(Eric M. Epstein Law Offices)


Facts

Barclays Capital Inc. filed a complaint against Watt Webb who then filed a counter-claim against Barclays related to his termination.

Contentions

CLAIMANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Respondent allegedly breached a promissory note he executed in October 2012. As such, claimant asserted claims for breach of contract, common count for money lent, common count for account statement, unjust enrichment, and indemnity. In response to respondent's counter-claim, claimant denied the allegations and asserted various affirmative defenses. Among other things, Barclays claimed respondent was fired for failing to comply with portfolio parameters as well Barclays policies and procedures. Barclays allegedly offered respondent various solutions to issues, but respondent was derisive and combative.

RESPONDENT'S CONTENTIONS:
Respondent denied claimant's allegations and asserted various affirmative defenses. In his counter-claim, respondent/counter-claimant asserted claims for wrongful termination in violation of public policy, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, retaliation; and injunctive relief in the form of an order directing Barclays to correct Webb's Form U5 by removing the alleged offending language and substituting that he was "terminated without cause." Respondent claimed he was not liable to repay the loan to Barclays.

Damages

Barclays sought the principal balance of $1,377,857 plus interest while Webb sought no less than $3.5 million in compensatory damages; $40,000 in statutory penalties; and at least $7 million in punitive damages as well as the modification of his "Form U5" records.

Result

The FINRA Panel made an adverse credibility finding against Webb. It then found him liable to Barclays in the principal amount of $1,377,858 plus $27,158 in interest from April 1, 2014 to Nov. 20, 2015, as well as pre-judgment daily interest of $35.59 from Nov. 20, 2015 until the date of service of this award. The Panel also found Barclays liable for $652,952 in attorney fees, and $27,593 in costs. The Panel then denied Webb's counterclaims in their entirety. The Panel also found Webb liable for attorney fees and costs

Other Information

ARBITRATORS: Mark S. Priver, Howard A. Emirhanian, Martin J. Kotowski. FILING DATE: May 27, 2014.


#98376

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

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