An investment adviser’s legal malpractice claims against New Jersey firm Bressler, Amery & Ross are precluded by prior arbitration against his employer before federal regulators, a state appeals court has ruled.

The plaintiff “knew or should have known the damages he sought to litigate and have decided at the arbitration proceeding could be precluded in subsequent litigation,” and he “did have an adequate opportunity to fully adjudicate his entitlement to the subject damages during the arbitration proceeding,” the Appellate Division said Tuesday in Petrone v. Sabo.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]