- 6 -
The letter concluded: “We do not feel that we can consent to act
on your behalf in the future in connection with this account, and
we respectfully request that you transfer your account to another
firm.”
In reply, petitioner made a handwritten notation on a copy
of Mr. Cabell’s letter to him, stating: “Your statement of the
facts of this case is not correct. As a result, I believe it is
necessary for us to meet to discuss the ‘exact’ nature of my
claims.” Petitioner then wrote the following letter to Mr.
Cabell:
May 12, 1987
Dear Mr. Cabell:
Your failure to respond to my request for an
appointment to reconcile the facts and issues with
respect to my account will only tarnish your defense to
support your position before any impartial tribunal.
In essence your solution is to create a “FORCED”
LIQUIDATION where I must sell out securities regardless
of the market timing. Also, by forcing me to transfer
this account to another Wall Street House, you believe
that you can sweep all of your past improprieties under
the rug with supposedly no trace left for public
scrutiny. The Churning transactions effectuated by
your salesmen are a matter of record. CASE IN POINT: I
have documented all short positions (PUT TRANSACTIONS)
sold and written in my account on a trade date basis
where the WALL STREET JOURNAL and NEW YORK TIMES
FINANCIAL PAGES listed an S or R. Obviously, in such a
case the purchaser had to be KIDDER, PEABODY as
principal. Shortly, thereafter, I was put stock where
the expiration period was greater than six months and
there was a less than 10% decline in the security price
from the trade date market price.
Who put the stock in my account and for what
reason? What other explanation? Why is KIDDER,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011