Legal
Ex-Morgan Stanley Advisor Fights For Public Lawsuit Hearing

A former broker at the US firm, who was fired from his job, is battling to have his lawsuit against Morgan Stanley heard in a public court rather than via arbitration.
Morgan
Stanley is reportedly trying to stop a wrongful termination
lawsuit filed by a former broker from being heard in public.
Lawyers for the US wealth management and wirehouse group have
filed a motion to move the lawsuit, filed in November last year
by ex-broker Craig Schmell, to arbitration,
InvestmentNews and other media reported. Schmell, 56,
was fired on October 31 last year after an 11-year stint at
Morgan Stanley, and two weeks prior to the release of his memoir,
The Uninvited: How I Crashed My Way Into Finding
Myself.
In a separate report, the New York Post said that a
federal judge, Anne Thompson, has said the lawsuit can proceed in
federal court and does not need to go to arbitration. According
to the NYP’s account of the case, the US firm said it sent
Schmell an email on September 2, 2015, setting out new employment
terms, with a link to a website page outlining the mandatory
arbitration process. The bank claimed Schmell accepted he must
deal with all disputes via arbitration. Schmell reportedly said
he hadn’t seen that email and since he began at the firm in 2006
before the arbitration clause came into force, he was exempt. The
judge agreed with that view, the NYP said.
Schmell’s book sets out his adventures prior to joining Morgan
Stanley, describing his parties with celebrities and how he got
into events such as the Grammy awards and a presidential
motorcade.
InvestmentNews said the lawsuit, which was originally
filed in New Jersey state court, charges Morgan Stanley with
discrimination related to Schmell's status as a recovering
alcoholic.
"We commend individuals like Mr Schmell who have gone through
recovery. Upon review of Mr Schmell's book, we explained our
concerns about him publishing a book detailing numerous misdeeds
and touting his 'gift of manipulation.' We also told him that he
could lose his job if he did not adequately address our concerns.
While he agreed to make certain edits, the book he intended to
publish still failed to sufficiently address them. He was
therefore terminated," the firm is quoted as saying in a
statement.