Suffolk New York Jury Instruction - 4.4.3 Rule 10(b) - 5(c) Fraudulent Practice or Course of Dealing Stockbroker Churning - Violation of Blue Sky Law and Breach of Fiduciary Duty

• Category: Federal - Jury Instructions
• State: Multi-State
• County: Suffolk
• Control #: US-11CF-4-4-3
• Format: Word; Rich Text

Description

This form contains sample jury instructions, to be used across the United States. These questions are to be used only as a model, and should be altered to more perfectly fit your own cause of action needs. Suffolk New York Jury Instruction — 4.4.3 Rule 10(b— - 5(c) Fraudulent Practice or Course of Dealing Stockbroker Churning — Violation of Blue Sky Law and Breach of Fiduciary Duty This jury instruction is applicable in cases involving fraudulent practices or courses of dealing by stockbrokers that result in churning, violation of Blue Sky Law, and breach of fiduciary duty. It helps the jury understand the legal standards and elements necessary to establish liability in such cases. Stockbroker churning refers to a practice where the stockbroker excessively trades securities within a client's account to generate commissions for themselves, rather than acting in the best interest of the client. Violation of Blue Sky Law pertains to the illegal sale or promotion of securities that do not comply with state-level regulations. Breach of fiduciary duty, on the other hand, involves the stockbroker's failure to act in the best interest of their client, violating the established fiduciary relationship. With this Suffolk New York jury instruction, the court outlines the elements that the plaintiff needs to prove to establish liability, such as: 1. The defendant was the plaintiff's stockbroker and had a fiduciary duty towards the plaintiff. 2. The defendant engaged in fraudulent practices or courses of dealing by excessively trading securities in the plaintiff's account. 3. The defendant's actions resulted in churning, where the trading was excessive and not in the plaintiff's best interest. 4. The defendant violated the Blue Sky Law by promoting or selling securities that did not comply with state regulations. 5. As a result of the defendant's actions, the plaintiff suffered financial harm or damages. Different types of Suffolk New York Jury Instruction — 4.4.3 Rule 10(b— - 5(c) Fraudulent Practice or Course of Dealing Stockbroker Churning — Violation of Blue Sky Law and Breach of Fiduciary Duty can include variations specific to each case, such as evidence requirements or additional elements based on the facts and circumstances of the case. These may be named differently or numbered differently depending on the specific case. However, the core principles of proving churning, violation of Blue Sky Law, and breach of fiduciary duty generally remain the same.

Suffolk New York Jury Instruction — 4.4.3 Rule 10(b— - 5(c) Fraudulent Practice or Course of Dealing Stockbroker Churning — Violation of Blue Sky Law and Breach of Fiduciary Duty This jury instruction is applicable in cases involving fraudulent practices or courses of dealing by stockbrokers that result in churning, violation of Blue Sky Law, and breach of fiduciary duty. It helps the jury understand the legal standards and elements necessary to establish liability in such cases. Stockbroker churning refers to a practice where the stockbroker excessively trades securities within a client's account to generate commissions for themselves, rather than acting in the best interest of the client. Violation of Blue Sky Law pertains to the illegal sale or promotion of securities that do not comply with state-level regulations. Breach of fiduciary duty, on the other hand, involves the stockbroker's failure to act in the best interest of their client, violating the established fiduciary relationship. With this Suffolk New York jury instruction, the court outlines the elements that the plaintiff needs to prove to establish liability, such as: 1. The defendant was the plaintiff's stockbroker and had a fiduciary duty towards the plaintiff. 2. The defendant engaged in fraudulent practices or courses of dealing by excessively trading securities in the plaintiff's account. 3. The defendant's actions resulted in churning, where the trading was excessive and not in the plaintiff's best interest. 4. The defendant violated the Blue Sky Law by promoting or selling securities that did not comply with state regulations. 5. As a result of the defendant's actions, the plaintiff suffered financial harm or damages. Different types of Suffolk New York Jury Instruction — 4.4.3 Rule 10(b— - 5(c) Fraudulent Practice or Course of Dealing Stockbroker Churning — Violation of Blue Sky Law and Breach of Fiduciary Duty can include variations specific to each case, such as evidence requirements or additional elements based on the facts and circumstances of the case. These may be named differently or numbered differently depending on the specific case. However, the core principles of proving churning, violation of Blue Sky Law, and breach of fiduciary duty generally remain the same.