William Radford represents clients in securities and commercial litigation matters, involving a wide variety of business litigation issues, including securities fraud, director and officer liability, fiduciary duties, antitrust, business torts, trade secrets, unfair competition, bank litigation, and professional liability.
Bill has substantial experience in the trial of jury and non-jury cases in both federal and state courts, as well as appellate arguments in those courts. In addition to his litigation practice, he regularly represents clients in arbitration proceedings before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). Bill has defended broker-dealers, registered representatives, and financial advisors from suitability, fraud, failure to supervise, “selling away,” and churning claims brought in FINRA arbitrations, as well as litigation. He also represents clients in investigations and proceedings brought by state and federal regulators and FINRA.
Represented large broker-dealer in resolving multiple lawsuits and arbitrations involving similar transactions and fraud and 10b-5 claims of over six hundred claimants.
Represented broker-dealers in suit brought against numerous defendants alleging conspiracy and manipulative conduct in connection with naked short selling of securities, resulting in dismissal of clients.
Represented broker-dealers and registered representatives in defending arbitrations involving suitability claims asserted by investors.
Obtained defense verdict for individual and corporate defendants in two-week jury trial against claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duties and oppression of minority shareholder.
Obtained defense verdict for individual and corporate defendants in five-week jury trial involving alleged oral partnership and claims of fraud and breach of fiduciary duties.
Obtained defense verdict for individual and corporate defendants in jury trial involving claims of trade secret misappropriation and unfair competition.
epresented economists who constructed computer model of sector of U.S. economy for use in forecasting effects of policy decisions in suit by party for whom model was constructed alleging various deficiencies with the model. Case involved in depth examination of the way economic computer models are constructed.
Represented county governmental unit in two week non-jury trial concerning disputed location of boundary line with adjoining county.
AV Peer Review Rated
Listed for Business Litigation
Education, Admissions & Activities
Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
Southwestern Law Journal
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
United States District Court of Texas
Northern, Southern, Eastern
Professional and Community Activities
American Bar Association
Dallas Bar Association
Business Litigation and Appellate Sections
Professional Liability Underwriters Society