Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Hugh HAMILTON, respondent, v. CANTOR FITZGERALD SECURITIES, etc., et al., appellants.
In an action to recover damages for wrongful termination of employment, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated June 17, 1998, which denied their motion to stay the action and to compel arbitration, and granted the plaintiff's cross motion to permanently stay arbitration.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendants' motion is granted, the plaintiff's cross motion is denied, the action is stayed, and the parties are directed to proceed to arbitration.
The defendant Cantor Fitzgerald Securities (hereinafter Cantor Fitzgerald), a member of the National Association of Securities Dealers (hereinafter NASD), hired the plaintiff as a securities broker. Upon accepting employment with Cantor Fitzgerald, the plaintiff executed an employment agreement and two Uniform Applications for Securities Industry Registration or Transfer (hereinafter Form U-4). The Form U-4 contained a broad arbitration clause. Although the plaintiff was subsequently fired and then rehired under a second employment contract which did not contain an arbitration clause, his obligation to arbitrate under the Form U-4 continued. The Form U-4 is not an employment contract, but rather an agreement between the plaintiff and NASD which remained effective (see, Gilmer v. Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 111 S.Ct. 1647, 114 L.Ed.2d 26; In re Prudential Ins. Co. of America Sales Practice Litigation, 133 F.3d 225; O'Donnell v. First Investors Corp., 872 F.Supp. 1274 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 25, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)