The nerve of ETURD...smh Under Nebraska’s UCC

Quote:

---

Under Nebraska’s UCC, securities held by a broker on behalf of customers are not treated as assets of the broker. See R.R.S. Neb. (U.C.C.) § 8-503 cmt. 1. (“This section specifies the sense in which a security entitlement is an interest in the property held by the securities intermediary. It expresses the ordinary understanding that securities that a firm holds for its customers are not general assets of the firm subject to the claims of creditors.”) (emphasis added). Similarly, courts tend to find that an intermediary broker is not a “transferee” because it does not exercise dominion or control over the securities it holds in its customers’ accounts. Receiving something as a conduit for a customer is not an enrichment. See, e.g., Bonded Fin. Servs., Inc. v. European Am. Bank, 838 F.2d 890, 893 (7th Cir. 1988) (explaining that “the minimum requirement of status as a ‘transferee’ is dominion over the money or other asset, the right to put money to one’s own purposes”) (emphasis added); see also Bowers v. Atlanta Motor Speedway, Inc. (In re Se. Hotel Properties), 99 F.3d 151, 156 (4th Cir. 1996) (adopting the Bonded Financial Services minimum requirement and adding the requirement that the person or entity must have also exercised legal dominion and control over the property).

---

Quote:

---

If the broker-dealer fails to deliver for 13 days, the regulation imposes a “close out” duty to purchase and deliver securities “of like kind and quantity.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/20...ify%20wall

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/m...v-manning/

---