Source: https://www.fmglaw.com/attorney_bio.php?id=111
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 09:10:05+00:00

Document:
John Goselin is a Partner in the firm’s Atlanta office. He brings over twenty years of experience in litigating commercial cases around the country with a focus on financial institutions and data security. He is the former Chief Litigation Counsel of a financial services company and managed the entire portfolio of litigation for the company’s four wholly-owned subsidiary broker-dealers.
Mr. Goselin’s clients include registered representatives, broker-dealers, investment advisor representatives and investment advisors. He regularly handles arbitrations, litigation and regulatory matters before the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and state regulators. From the unique perspective of a chief litigation counsel seeing the entire litigation portfolio of four broker-dealers, Mr. Goselin has experienced the entire array of legal difficulties that financial institutions and individual advisors may face from the routine customer suitability claim to a complex ponzi scheme to the challenges of defending matters before state and national regulators in investigations and routine examinations.
In addition, Mr. Goselin has substantial experience representing public and private companies in class action litigation, director and officer cases, shareholder and derivative litigation, intellectual property, deal protection litigation, franchise/franchisee litigation, and professional liability cases against insurance agents, accountants, lawyers and other miscellaneous professionals. He also represents businesses and financial institutions in regulatory and litigation matters brought by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
Mr. Goselin also has significant experience in defending claims involving ERISA and non-ERISA fiduciary matters. Mr. Goselin's experience includes cases concerning ERISA fiduciaries in defense of DOL investigations and litigation involving 401(k) management, multi-employer pension liability and breach of fiduciary duty claims.
In his cyber practice, Mr. Goselin advises and represents businesses in a variety of matters relating to data security and privacy laws. He has extensive experience helping businesses respond to data breaches and comply with notification laws involving all kinds of information, but with particular expertise with regard to the financial data maintained by financial services institutions. He also represents businesses in litigation matters related to data security and privacy, including lawsuits under federal laws such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, as well as investigations into privacy practices by agencies like FINRA, the SEC and the Federal Trade Commission.
Eric Miller and Platinum Home Care, Inc. v. CareMinders Home Care, Inc., AAA Case No. 30 114 Y 00613 13 (2015). Obtained a full defense verdict on the franchisee’s affirmative claims and a $1,904,385.73 judgment on behalf of a home health care franchisor in AAA arbitration and related proceedings to confirm the arbitration award.
JMW Coastal Home Care, Inc. v. CareMinders Home Care, Inc., AAA Case No. 30-20-1300-1060 (2016). Represented a home health care franchisor in an AAA arbitration that was ultimately dismissed with prejudice before any arbitration hearing.
CareMinders Home Care, Inc. v. CM South East Texas Houston, LLC, et al., 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket No. 16-11054 (2016). Representing a home health care franchisor before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals seeking to vacate a $222,497.40 adverse arbitration award in an AAA arbitration where the franchisor had been represented by another firm in the arbitration.
CareMinders Home Care, Inc. v. Lori Kianka and Compassionate Care, LLC, 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket No. 16-10206 (2016). Representing a home health care franchisor before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals defending and seeking to preserve a $232,789.30 AAA arbitration award in favor of the franchisor.
CareMinders Home Care, Inc. v. Concura, Inc., et al., 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket No. 16-10112 (2016). Representing a home health care franchisor before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals defending and seeking to preserve a $113,476.00 AAA arbitration award in favor of the franchisor.
State of Georgia v. David L. Pimper, No. 02CR20276 (2004). Successful defense of registered representative of New York broker dealer in eight day criminal trial in Floyd County, Georgia on charges of violations of the Georgia Securities Act and theft by deception in relation to an investment advisory business.
Herndon v. Equitable Life Assurance Society, 325 F.3d 1252 (11th Circuit 2003). Significant participation in designing and executing the litigation strategy that resulted in dismissal with prejudice of putative class action claims alleging fraud in connection with the purchase and sale of variable life insurance products. The eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal with prejudice - an issue of first impression in the Circuit.
Welborn v. Royal Alliance Associates, Inc. et al., Civ. A. No. 1:00-CV-1509 (N.D. Ga. 2002). Significant participation in defending a broker-dealer and their registered representative in multi-faceted litigation including a federal class action pending in the Northern District of Georgia. The motion to dismiss was granted as to nine out of ten causes of action. Successfully opposed Plaintiff's motion for class certification. The plaintiff dismissed his action in favor of pursuing NASD (k/n/a FINRA) arbitrations. The civil portion of this litigation (including the follow-on NASD (k/n/a FINRA) arbitrations) ultimately settled in the range of future defense costs.
Mindis Acquisition Corporation v. BDO Seidman LLP, 559 S.E.2d Ill (Ga. App. 2002). Significant participation in prosecuting a $44 million negligent misrepresentation trial against an accounting firm. Significant participation in successful appeal from an improper grant of JNOV and successful defense against a cross-appeal regarding the grant of summary judgment dismissing third party indemnification claims.
In re S1 Corporation Securities Litigation, 173 F.Supp.2d 1334 (N.D. Ga. 2001). Significant participation in defending a federal class action lawsuit alleging misrepresentations in the Company's forward-looking statements. The motion to dismiss was granted. Plaintiffs chose not to amend their complaint and did not prosecute an appeal.
In re SCB Computer Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation, 149 F.Supp.2d 334 (W.D. Tenn. 2001). Significant participation in defending a federal class action lawsuit alleging complex accounting fraud issues and restatement of the Company's financial reports. The motion to dismiss was granted with prejudice.
In re Miller Industries, Inc. Securities Litigation, 120 F.Supp.2d 1372 (N.D. Ga. 2000) Significant participation in defending a federal class action lawsuit alleging complex accounting fraud issues. At the time of this decision, this was the first grant of summary judgment for defendants under the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1996 in the Eleventh Circuit.
American Realty Capital Trust, Inc.-Represented a Maryland REIT and its officers and directors in the Circuit Court of Baltimore City, New York Supreme Court and the District of Maryland against allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and inadequate proxy disclosure arising from merger with Realty Income Corporation. The transaction closed on schedule.
American Realty Capital Properties, Inc. – Represented a Maryland REIT and its officers and directors in the Circuit Court of Baltimore City, New York Supreme Court and the District of Arizona in 15 lawsuits challenging three separate mergers alleging that the Company and/or its officer and directors breached fiduciary duties, aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties and made inadequate proxy disclosures. The three transactions were valued at more than $15 billion and all three closed on schedule.
IRT Property, Inc. - Represented a Georgia REIT and its officers and directors in Cobb County, Georgia Superior Court against allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and inadequate proxy disclosure arising from merger with Equity One, Inc., a Florida-based REIT. The complaint alleged that the board of directors obtained an inadequate price for the shareholders. The Court denied the plaintiff's request for expedited discovery and preliminary injunction. The transaction closed on schedule.
CTI Molecular Imaging, Inc. - Litigation in Tennessee Chancery Court arising from the $1 billion merger of the company with a subsidiary of Seimans A.G. The case was removed to federal court where the court denied the plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction. The transaction closed at the scheduled date. The case was ultimately dismissed with prejudice without any payment to the plaintiff.
Renal Care Group, Inc. - Litigation in Tennessee Chancery Court arising from the merger of the company with Fresenius Medical Care A.G.. The plaintiff failed to even seek an injunction. The transaction closed on schedule.
Ameripath, Inc. - Litigation in Florida state court arising from the $2 billion acquisition of the company by Quest Diagnostics, Inc. The transaction closed on schedule.
Accredo Health Group - Litigation in Tennessee Chancery Court arising from the acquisition of the company by Medco Health Solutions, Inc. The plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction was denied. The transaction closed at the scheduled date.
Scientific-Atlanta Corporation - Litigation in Fulton County, Georgia Superior Court arising from the $7 billion merger of the company with Cisco Systems, Inc. The court denied the plaintiff's motion for expedited discovery and denied the motion for preliminary injunction. The transaction closed at the scheduled date.
Georgia-Pacific Corporation - Litigation in Fulton County, Georgia Superior Court arising from the $21 billion acquisition of the company by Koch Industries, Inc. The court denied the plaintiff's motion for expedited discovery and denied the motion for preliminary injunction. The transaction closed at the scheduled date.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.