Replies to post #98614 on DD Support Board and Research Team

[shajandr]

"But of course everything would depend on whether anyone got that in writing."

Sorry, even if they have it in writing, I don't see how a client of TDA would have a winning claim.

I'm very open to others floating their theory of how TDA clients would assert a legal claim to an illegal dividend, regardless of whatever TDA told them in writing or otherwise.

The only legal theory I personally can see in CRGP is equitable estoppel (based on detrimental reliance). And without going into a great deal of great detail (sic), I do nott foresee any court finding that these circumstances are sufficiently egregious (nor have other elements of unfairness and contractual and/or tortious obligation) for a court to apply equitable estoppel.

If folks have OTHER theories of how a client would have a potentially winning claim against TDA for the illegal dividend distribution, I'm all ears and eyes to learn those theories.

I can't see that detrimental reliance (equitable estoppel) would be a winner for clients wishing to keep their unjust enrichment, regardless of what TDA represented to them - especially, but nott limited to, the disclaimers in the TDA account agreement those clients signed.