WHY HIRE DOUGLAS SCHULZ?
Q: What are some other examples of what separates Mr. Schulz from other securities expert witnesses?
A: There are many firms who have multiple employees or associates that are involved in the firm’s securities work. Often, the lawyer and the client are never fully aware of which individual is conducting the research and analysis for their case. At those firms, you may hire an expert based on his credentials, yet much of the work in your case is done by individuals who have very limited experience. That is not in the best interest of the client. You always want the person that’s going to be giving the sworn testimony to be the very same person who did the work. Since Mr. Schulz is a sole practitioner, that is never an issue. Also, Mr. Schulz knows many securities experts who have been out of the industry for quite a long time and their expert witness work is often just an adjunct to other work, interests and hobbies. Mr. Schulz has lived, breathed and slept securities, investments, securities regulation and litigation for 30 years. And it goes back even further when you consider he started trading securities fairly actively back in the sixth grade. Mr. Schulz has been hired in over 1,148 cases and loves his work. His wife Tracy Pride Stoneman is a nationally recognized securities lawyer who works on securities exclusively. Living on their 160-acre ranch in the mountains in southern Colorado in a very remote location allows them both to work a 60 to 80 hour week. Their cocktail and dinner hours are spent in rigorous conversation and debate on the most topical securities issues of the day, and on each of their cases. much of the couple’s time is spent in rigorous conversation and debate on each of their cases or the most topical securities issues of the day.
Q: Does Mr.
Schulz have additional experience giving sworn testimony that is not a part of
the 643 figure?
Anyone who has had any experience working either for the district attorney or
the public defender’s office knows the docket schedule and court appearances
is almost a daily occurrence. As a special investigator for the New Mexico
State Public Defender’s Office in Albuquerque New Mexico, Mr. Schulz regularly
gave both direct and cross-examination sworn testimony. Additionally, when he
performed financial investigation and due diligence work for broker-dealers,
investment bankers, and merchant bankers, he was often called on to testify in
state and federal court.
Q: Is Mr. Schulz hired solely as a securities
expert witness or does he perform other roles for the lawyers/clients who hire
A: Yes, it is
common for Mr. Schulz to be hired as a securities litigation/arbitration
consultant. Often, Mr. Schulz is contacted by lawyers who don’t have a lot of
experience in FINRA arbitrations. This creates a special challenge for that
lawyer and his or her client, because the defense counsel is almost always very
experienced in this special field of litigation. Of course, his 1,148 cases
provide him with an excellent working knowledge of every single aspect of FINRA
arbitrations. Additionally, for roughly 30 years, he has worked very closely
with his wife who does exclusively securities litigation representing both
stockbrokers and investors. For these and other reasons, the less experienced
lawyers often are thrilled to find an expert that can wear two hats. In
addition to his regular securities expert witness assistance, he often helps
the attorney on such subjects as drafting the Statement of Claim, the
arbitrator selection process, the document and information discovery process,
motions, and briefs, etc.
Q: How can Mr. Schulz be of assistance in the discovery process in arbitration?
A: The discovery process in securities
arbitration is where each party attempts to obtain all of the key, important
documents that they feel will assist in the prosecution or defense of the case.
One of the first articles Mr. Schulz wrote, in
conjunction with his wife, was on the discovery process (see Securities
Arbitration Commentator article dated November, 1990). Twenty-eight years
later, the process is still imperfect in that brokerage firms go to great
lengths to prevent the production of harmful documents. Mr. Schulz can be a great asset in this area for two reasons. First, he
is infinitely familiar with what documents are necessary for any given case. He
has seen just about every account form, commission/production run, the various
compliance and policy and procedure manuals for the majority of broker-dealers
in the country. Second, he is often called upon to draft discovery requests and
to assist counsel with arguments for production for the preliminary hearing
regarding those requests.
Q: In addition to Mr. Schulz’s constant securities regulatory research, what else does he do to keep in constant contact with Wall Street and the investment community?
A: Though Mr. Schulz no longer manages money for private individuals and entities, he still
manages large sums of money for family accounts. Additionally, both individually and with
other partners, he manages a finance company that lends money on mostly real
estate projects such as mezzanine loans, bridge loans, construction loans, and
Q: Douglas Schulz claims to have an excellent track record for his clients, is
there some proof?
A: In response to the question, the
following is a brief list of some cases I was involved with between roughly 2018 and
2019, some results and awards.
Ø Claimant v. major brokerage firm, Louisiana, $3.15 million arbitration award, panel awarded $140,000 in expert fees (I was the sole expert) and since $1.5 million were the out of pockets, this is a significant well-managed, comparative award
Ø Claimant v. major regional brokerage firm, California, $1 million arbitration award (client made $4 million in his account, so this was all well-managed comparative damages)
Ø Claimant v. major regional brokerage firm, Arizona, $100,000 punitive arbitration award
Ø Claimant v. major brokerage firm, North Carolina, $125,000 consisting of all well-managed damages
Ø Claimant v. major regional brokerage firm, Arizona, $920,000 which included well-managed damages and interest, $58,000 my expert fees and $246,000 in attorney’s fees
Ø Claimant v. major internet brokerage firm, California, $720,000 well-managed damages, and expert fees
Ø Claimant v. regional money manager, New Mexico, arbitration, $519,000 mostly well-managed damages. (I assisted throughout the case, but ended up not testifying)
also been hired as the expert for a former Tesla employee who was sued by Tesla
for $167 million dollars. My objective is to show that my client’s actions did
not cause Tesla’s publicly traded stock to decline in value.
Q: Are there other securities activities
that Mr. Schulz is involved in that don’t specifically relate to litigation?
A: Mr. Schulz spends time educating investors and attempting to work with regulators in improving the securities markets and environment for investors. He has spoken and testified before numerous state and federal elected representatives. He participated in the Ruder Task Force and often works with investigators on a state, federal and local level. Mr. Schulz was a key witness for the SEC in their major investigation into the sale of limited partnerships and private placements in the late eighties and early nineties. His most recent article on Power of Attorney accounts at Internet/online brokerage firms is an attempt to prompt the regulators to be more proactive regulating Internet/online brokerage firms.