The Law Offices of Place and Hanley, LLC

Securities Arbitration Lawyers Florida

The Law Offices of Place & Hanley, LLC is a nationally recognized securities and commodities arbitration law firm which represents investors nationwide. At Place & Hanley we represent investors in claims against their brokers, broker dealers, investment advisors, financial advisors and insurance companies. Our securities lawyers represent investors who have lost their savings when their brokerage accounts were mishandled. Our attorneys are experienced in providing focused and aggressive representation for investors who have been the victims of financial fraud, negligence and unsuitable investments.  Our firm has experience in prosecuting claims against the major Wall Street firms, including Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, UBS, Oppenheimer as well as many mid-sized broker dealers.

Our attorneys have recovered millions of dollars for individual investors. Our firm has experience handling group arbitration claims and class action litigation involving securities related matters. We have successfully recovered punitive damages and attorneys’ fees for our clients.  The attorneys and staff at the Law Offices of Place & Hanley are committed to representing aggrieved investors who have lost money because of the negligent or willful acts of the clients once trusted financial advisor, broker and brokerage firm.

Our attorneys have represented thousands of clients nationwide who were victims of misrepresentations, commission churning, unsuitable investments, unauthorized transactions, execution failures, excessive mark-ups, disappearing funds, botched transfers, "selling away" from firms, unregistered brokers, unregistered securities, improper margin liquidations, broker bribes, fraudulent research, "boiler room" sales practices and other wrongful acts. Place & Hanley has prosecuted cases involving stocks, bonds, "penny" stocks, "junk" bonds, options, commodities, mutual funds, REIT's, limited partnerships, derivative securities, collateralized debt obligations “CDO”, auction rate securities and other investments.

Attorneys for the firm practice before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) which was created in 2007 through the consolidation of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) enforcement and arbitration divisions. The firm also represents clients in state and federal courts to resolve financial disputes between customers, brokerage firms and other financial institutions.

Our firm has been successful not only in recovering our client’s out of pocket losses, but in multiple cases our clients have received punitive damages and reimbursement of their attorneys’ fees. Please visit the verdicts and settlements page for examples of the securities & stockbroker fraud cases we have handled for our clients. Our success is attributable to hard work, client dedication and an in-depth knowledge of the securities industry.

UN court: Australia cannot use seized documents

The United Nations' highest court on Monday banned Australia from making any use of documents it seized from a lawyer working for East Timor in an arbitration case over a multibillion-dollar oil and gas deal between the two nations.

The International Court of Justice also ordered Canberra not to "interfere in any way in communications" between East Timor and its legal advisers in the arbitration or future negotiations on a maritime boundary between resources-rich Australia and its tiny, impoverished northern neighbor.

Australian agents in December raided the Canberra office of a legal adviser to East Timor and seized documents and data. That followed claims by a former Australian spy that his country bugged the East Timorese government ahead of negotiations on the Timor Sea Treaty that carves up revenue from oil and gas under the sea between the two countries.

East Timor wants to renegotiate the treaty, arguing that it is invalid because of the alleged bugging.

It went to the world court arguing the seizure was illegal. Monday's orders did not address that claim, which will be litigated later.

SC Supreme Court to rule on public autopsy reports

South Carolina's Supreme Court will begin grappling with that question Wednesday, when it hears a lawsuit by a Sumter County newspaper against the county's coroner.

The Item newspaper wants the high court to toss out a lower court's ruling that said autopsies do not have to be made public because they do not fall under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

The coroner says autopsies should be considered medical records that are exempt from public view. The newspaper says autopsy reports are investigative tools, not medical records.

Open records advocates say the Sumter County case is an example of government officials making it harder to get public documents.

It's a debate that is far from settled nationally. About 15 states across the U.S. allow the public release of an autopsy report. About a half-dozen other states allow the release of reports not being used as part of a criminal investigation. The rest severely restrict what's released or don't give any information from the reports, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Keeping autopsy records secret closes off an important tool to make sure police agencies do the right thing when they investigate deaths, especially people shot and killed by officials or who die in custody, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center.

"There is any number of cases over the years where journalist watchdogs have been able to shed light on suspicious circumstances only by having access on those records," LoMonte said. "And those records don't just show culpability, they can clear someone, too."

SC Supreme Court to rule on public autopsy reports

South Carolina's Supreme Court will begin grappling with that question Wednesday, when it hears a lawsuit by a Sumter County newspaper against the county's coroner.

The Item newspaper wants the high court to toss out a lower court's ruling that said autopsies do not have to be made public because they do not fall under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

The coroner says autopsies should be considered medical records that are exempt from public view. The newspaper says autopsy reports are investigative tools, not medical records.

Open records advocates say the Sumter County case is an example of government officials making it harder to get public documents.

It's a debate that is far from settled nationally. About 15 states across the U.S. allow the public release of an autopsy report. About a half-dozen other states allow the release of reports not being used as part of a criminal investigation. The rest severely restrict what's released or don't give any information from the reports, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Keeping autopsy records secret closes off an important tool to make sure police agencies do the right thing when they investigate deaths, especially people shot and killed by officials or who die in custody, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center.

"There is any number of cases over the years where journalist watchdogs have been able to shed light on suspicious circumstances only by having access on those records," LoMonte said. "And those records don't just show culpability, they can clear someone, too."

SC Supreme Court to rule on public autopsy reports

South Carolina's Supreme Court will begin grappling with that question Wednesday, when it hears a lawsuit by a Sumter County newspaper against the county's coroner.

The Item newspaper wants the high court to toss out a lower court's ruling that said autopsies do not have to be made public because they do not fall under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

The coroner says autopsies should be considered medical records that are exempt from public view. The newspaper says autopsy reports are investigative tools, not medical records.

Open records advocates say the Sumter County case is an example of government officials making it harder to get public documents.

It's a debate that is far from settled nationally. About 15 states across the U.S. allow the public release of an autopsy report. About a half-dozen other states allow the release of reports not being used as part of a criminal investigation. The rest severely restrict what's released or don't give any information from the reports, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Keeping autopsy records secret closes off an important tool to make sure police agencies do the right thing when they investigate deaths, especially people shot and killed by officials or who die in custody, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center.

"There is any number of cases over the years where journalist watchdogs have been able to shed light on suspicious circumstances only by having access on those records," LoMonte said. "And those records don't just show culpability, they can clear someone, too."

SC Supreme Court to rule on public autopsy reports

South Carolina's Supreme Court will begin grappling with that question Wednesday, when it hears a lawsuit by a Sumter County newspaper against the county's coroner.

The Item newspaper wants the high court to toss out a lower court's ruling that said autopsies do not have to be made public because they do not fall under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

The coroner says autopsies should be considered medical records that are exempt from public view. The newspaper says autopsy reports are investigative tools, not medical records.

Open records advocates say the Sumter County case is an example of government officials making it harder to get public documents.

It's a debate that is far from settled nationally. About 15 states across the U.S. allow the public release of an autopsy report. About a half-dozen other states allow the release of reports not being used as part of a criminal investigation. The rest severely restrict what's released or don't give any information from the reports, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Keeping autopsy records secret closes off an important tool to make sure police agencies do the right thing when they investigate deaths, especially people shot and killed by officials or who die in custody, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center.

"There is any number of cases over the years where journalist watchdogs have been able to shed light on suspicious circumstances only by having access on those records," LoMonte said. "And those records don't just show culpability, they can clear someone, too."

SC Supreme Court to rule on public autopsy reports

South Carolina's Supreme Court will begin grappling with that question Wednesday, when it hears a lawsuit by a Sumter County newspaper against the county's coroner.

The Item newspaper wants the high court to toss out a lower court's ruling that said autopsies do not have to be made public because they do not fall under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

The coroner says autopsies should be considered medical records that are exempt from public view. The newspaper says autopsy reports are investigative tools, not medical records.

Open records advocates say the Sumter County case is an example of government officials making it harder to get public documents.

It's a debate that is far from settled nationally. About 15 states across the U.S. allow the public release of an autopsy report. About a half-dozen other states allow the release of reports not being used as part of a criminal investigation. The rest severely restrict what's released or don't give any information from the reports, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Keeping autopsy records secret closes off an important tool to make sure police agencies do the right thing when they investigate deaths, especially people shot and killed by officials or who die in custody, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center.

"There is any number of cases over the years where journalist watchdogs have been able to shed light on suspicious circumstances only by having access on those records," LoMonte said. "And those records don't just show culpability, they can clear someone, too."