The allegations read: Syde was a subject of the customer\\u2019s complaint against his member firm and/or other named respondents that asserted the following causes of action: common law claims for fraud, conversion and breach of fiduciary duty; violation of minn. Stat. \\u00a745.026 and minn. Rule 2876.5024; violation of the minnesota securities act, minn. Stat. \\u00a780a.68 & \\u00a780a.76, and minn. Rules 2876.5021 & 2876.5023; violation of the minnesota civil theft statute, minn. Stat. \\u00a7604.14; violation of minnesota prevention of consumer fraud statute, minn. Stat. \\u00a7325f.68, minnesota deceptive trade practices act, minn. Stat. \\u00a7325d.44, and minn. Stat. \\u00a78.31, subd. 3a; violation of the minnesota prevention of deceptive acts against vulnerable persons statute, minn.stat. \\u00a7325f.71; violation of various finra conduct rules, including but not limited to (i) finra rule 2010; (ii) rules prohibiting the sale of unsuitable investments; (iii) rules requiring strong supervision of salespersons, including supervision of their outside business activities and private securities transactions; (iv) rules prohibiting \\u201cselling away\\u201d and unauthorized trading; (v) rules banning conflicts of interest; and (vi) rules requiring fair dealing with customers; and respondeat superior.
