Saturday, June 16, 2007

Nebraska Court of Appeals in an unpublished opinion agrees that summary judgment against class action plaintiffs who sued Ameritrade for failing to provide real time options' quotes should stand. Appeals Court agrees that Ameritrade did not agree to provide real options quotes to subscribers who paid $20 per month for real time stock only quotes.

Green v. Ameritrade, A-05-651

Appeals Court rejects plaintiffs action because Ameritrade did not promise in its information contract and the relevant NASDAQ agreement to provide real time options quotes, just real time quotes for actual stocks, even though the option information server was on Ameritrade premises. The appeals court additionally notes the Plaintiff did not allege any trading losses from the incomplete information. Giving the plaintiff the benefit of the doubt, the Ameritrade trading handbook that mentioned options quote did not obligate Ameritrade to provide real time options quotes, even if you assume the handbook was a contractual document. (Plaintiff) contends that because the handbook contains information regarding options trading and the real time quote service, the real time quote service includes option quotes. He is basically arguing that because the words “options” and “real time” are contained within the same document, one must infer that Ameritrade promised real time quotes for options to subscribers of the real time quote service. We conclude that such an inference is illogical. Even when the Trading Account Handbook is considered in conjunction with the agreements governing the contractual relationship, there is no basis to conclude that the handbook promises real time option quotes to real time service subscribers. Accordingly, even if the Trading Account Handbook was part of the contract between (Plaintiff) and Ameritrade, it does not contain a promise by Ameritrade to provide real time quotes for options

1 comment:

ptg said...

You know, they offer courses in consumerism in college these days. I'll bet the syllabus doesn't include mention of the concept of caveat emptor.

Perhaps the schools should teach Contracts instead.