Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Item 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Many aspects of the Company's business involve substantial risks of liability. In the normal course of business, the Company has been the subject of customer complaints and has been named as a defendant or co-defendant in various lawsuits or arbitrations creating substantial exposure. The Company is also involved from time to time in certain governmental and self-regulatory agency investigations and proceedings. These proceedings arise primarily from securities brokerage, asset management and investment banking activities. Regulatory investigations in the financial services industry may include investigations by multiple regulators of matters involving the same or similar underlying facts and seek substantial penalties, fines or other monetary relief.
While the ultimate resolution of routine pending litigation, regulatory and other matters cannot be currently determined, in the opinion of management, after consultation with legal counsel, the Company does not believe that the resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on its condensed consolidated balance sheet and statement of cash flows. However, the Company's results of operations could be materially affected during any period if liabilities in that period differ from prior estimates.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, multiple adverse results in arbitrations, litigations or regulatory proceedings currently filed or to be filed against the Company, could have a material adverse effect on the Company's results of operations and financial condition, including its cash position.
The materiality of legal and regulatory matters to the Company's future operating results depends on the level of future results of operations as well as the timing and ultimate outcome of such legal and regulatory matters. See "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Factors Affecting 'Forward-Looking Statements'" in Part I, Item 2.
In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, the Company establishes reserves for litigation and regulatory matters when those matters present loss contingencies that are both probable and reasonably estimable. When loss contingencies are not both probable and reasonably estimable, the Company does not establish reserves. In some of the matters described below, loss contingencies are not probable and reasonably estimable in the view of management and, accordingly, the Company has not established reserves for those matters. For legal or regulatory proceedings where there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss or an additional loss may be incurred, the Company estimates a range of aggregate loss in excess of amounts accrued of $0 to $47.0 million. This estimated aggregate range is based upon currently available information for those legal proceedings in which the Company is involved, where an estimate for such losses can be made. For certain cases, the Company does not believe that it can make an estimate. The foregoing estimate is based on various factors, including the varying stages of the proceedings (including the fact that some are currently in preliminary stages), the numerous yet-unresolved issues in many of the proceedings and the attendant uncertainty of the various potential outcomes of such proceedings. Accordingly, the Company's estimate will change from time to time, and actual losses may be materially more than the current estimate.
On August 31, 2021, a complaint in a class action entitled 6694 Dawson Blvd, LLC, Individually and on Behalf of a Class of Similarly Situated Persons v. Oppenheimer & Co. Inc., James Wallace Woods, Michael J. Mooney, Britt Wright, William V. Conn, Jr., Conn & Co. Tax Practice, LLC, Conn & Company Consulting, LLC and Kathleen Lloyd , was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Plaintiff purported to represent a class of investors in Horizon Private Equity, III, LLC (“Horizon”). Horizon is alleged to be a fraudulent scheme and the plaintiff was seeking unspecified damages sounding in violations of the Georgia RICO statute, breach of fiduciary duty, procurement of breach of fiduciary duty, negligent misrepresentation, aiding and abetting fraud, unjust enrichment, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff did not allege Oppenheimer received any of the funds invested in Horizon, but rather that Oppenheimer’s purported failure to properly supervise its employees allowed the alleged scheme to occur and continue. On November 22, 2021, Oppenheimer filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on a number of grounds. The motion to dismiss was fully briefed on January 17, 2022, and the Court heard oral argument on the motion on June 21, 2022. On August 17, 2022, the Court granted Oppenheimer’s motion and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. On September 21, 2022, 6694 Dawson Blvd, LLC filed a first amended complaint solely on behalf of itself based on substantially the same allegations as the original complaint seeking unspecified damages sounding solely in violations of the Georgia RICO statute. On October 14, 2022, Oppenheimer filed a motion to dismiss the first amended complaint on a number of grounds. On October 21, 2022, 6694 Dawson Blvd, LLC voluntarily dismissed its first amended complaint without prejudice, thereby terminating the action.
57
Table of Contents
In addition to the class action described in the preceding paragraph Oppenheimer has also been named as a respondent in twenty-eight arbitrations, many containing multiple claimants, each filed before FINRA, relating to investments made by former Oppenheimer clients who invested in Horizon. Claimants allege many of the causes of action alleged in the class action described in the preceding paragraph. The arbitrations claiming specific monetary damages allege damages of approximately $45.3 million in the aggregate while others claim unspecified damages.
Oppenheimer believes these claims to be without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously against these claims.
One arbitration entitled Donald Robinson, Timothy and Sharon Padden, Rhett Rainey, Kelly A. Rainey Trust, Toucan Holdings LP, Robert Goodman, Robert Daniel Burgner, Individually and as Trustee of the Burgner Family Charitable Remainder Trust, Douglas Kasemeier, Wesley Callaway, and Billy Loveless v. Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. (the “Robinson Arbitration”) was commenced on August 31, 2021. On September 6, 2022, the arbitration panel found in favor of the claimants and awarded them total compensatory damages of approximately $5.7 million, RICO damages pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 16-14-6(c) of approximately $14.2 million, and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs of approximately $16.8 million. The total amount awarded to claimants was $36,744,276 (the “Robinson Award”). On October 6, 2022, Oppenheimer filed a motion to vacate the Robinson Award with the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia based on, among other defects, arbitrator bias, failure to postpone the hearing to permit key witnesses to testify, and manifest disregard of the law. On October 18, 2022, the claimants in the Robinson Arbitration filed a petition to confirm the Arbitration Award. Oppenheimer intends to vigorously pursue vacatur of the Robinson Award.
On June 30, 2022, the Company received a "Wells Notice" from the SEC requesting that Oppenheimer make a written submission to the SEC to explain why Oppenheimer should not be charged with violations of Section 15c2-12 of the Exchange Act and Rule15c2-12 thereunder as well as Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board Rules G-17 and G-27 in relation to its sales of municipal notes pursuant to an exemption from continuing disclosure contained in Rule 15c2-12. On September 13, 2022, the SEC filed a complaint against Oppenheimer in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”) alleging that Oppenheimer violated Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rule15c2-12 thereunder as well as Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board Rules G-17 and G-27 for not having fully complied with the exemption from the continuing disclosure obligations under Rule 15c2-12. The SEC asked the Court to enter an order enjoining Oppenheimer from violating the above referenced rules and requiring it to disgorge approximately $1.9 million plus interest. The Company believes such claim to be without merit and intends to vigorously defend itself against any such claim.
58
Table of Contents
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
During the nine months ended September 30, 2022, there were no material changes to the information contained in Part I, Item 1A of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.