Khan v. Stiffel
ORDER Adopting 24 Report and Recommendation and Denying 27 Motion to Stop Judgment; granting 19 MOTION to Have Arbitration Award Converted; granting 20 MOTION to Determine Interest Rate. Signed by Senior Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp on 5/24/2011. (ral)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 10-81232-CIV-RYSKAMP/VITUNAC
MUHAMMAD A. KAHN,
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING MOTION
TO STOP JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court pursuant to the April 18, 2011 [DE 24] report and
recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Ann E. Vitunac. Defendant has filed two
motions, a motion to have the arbitration award converted to a judgment and a motion to
determine the interest rate. The Court construes Defendant’s motions as a motion to confirm the
arbitration award and to enter final judgment in Defendant’s favor.1 Plaintiff filed an “objection
and motion to stop the judgment” on April 27, 2011 [DE 27], requesting that the Court refrain
from entering a final judgment on the grounds that Plaintiff has appealed the denial of his motion
to vacate.2 The Court has reviewed the report and recommendation, the objection filed thereto
and has conducted a de novo review of the underlying record.
In 2008, Defendant hired Plaintiff’s firm, Bluechip Securities, Inc. (“Bluechip”), for the
provision of brokerage services. In 2009, Defendant commenced arbitration proceedings before
Both parties are pro se. Accordingly, the Court construes each party’s filings liberally.
The Court treats Plaintiff’s “objection and motion to stop the judgment” as both an objection to the April
18, 2011 report and as a stand alone motion.
the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) against Plaintiff and Bluechip, alleging
misrepresentations, suitability and churning. On October 1, 2010, a three-member FINRA panel
held Plaintiff and Bluechip “jointly and severally liable on the claim of churning” and awarded
Defendant $97,030.00 in compensatory damages, plus $300 as reimbursement for the claim filing
fee. See In the Matter of the Arbitration Between: Jerry Stiffel, Claimant, and Bluechip
Securities, Inc. and Muhammad A. Kahn, Respondents, FINRA Case No. 09-02448 (DE 1-2, p.
14). Plaintiff moved this Court to vacate the award, asserting that the arbitrators wrongly refused
to postpone the final arbitration hearing.
On February 28, 2011, Judge Vitunac entered a report recommending that the Court deny
Plaintiff’s motion to vacate because the arbitrators reasonably refused to postpone the hearing for
a third time. The Court adopted the report on March 11, 2011.
The only reason Plaintiff offers for avoiding confirmation of the arbitration award is that
Plaintiff has appealed the denial of the motion to vacate. Indeed, on April 1, 2011, Plaintiff filed
a notice of appeal of the order denying the motion to vacate. Plaintiff also sought in forma
pauperis status on appeal. Plaintiff’s appeal terminated on April 28, 2011, however, when the
Court denied his motion for in forma pauperis status. Whereas the Court has denied Plaintiff’s
motion to vacate the arbitration award, and whereas Plaintiff has offered no basis to avoid
confirmation of the arbitration award, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the April 18, 2011 report and recommendation is
ADOPTED, AFFIRMED and APPROVED. Defendant’s motions to convert arbitration award to
judgment and determine interest rate [DEs 19, 20] are GRANTED. Final judgment shall be
entered by separate order. It is further
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff’s motion to stop judgment, filed April 27,
2011 [DE 27], is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED at Chambers in West Palm Beach, Florida, this 24th day of
S/Kenneth L. Ryskamp
KENNETH L. RYSKAMP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?