Former Stifel, Nicolaus & Company broker Chuck A. Roberts (CRD# 2064602) sits at the center of one of the largest clusters of structured-note arbitration claims in recent FINRA history. This page is maintained by Bakhtiari & Harrison as a running tracker of the settlements, awards, and pending claims tied to Roberts, and it’s updated as new filings are reported by named outlets and reflected on FINRA BrokerCheck.
Chuck Roberts Stifel Nicolaus Case: Current Status at a Glance
Chuck Roberts was barred from the securities industry by FINRA in July 2025 and is no longer a registered broker. As of late September 2026, Stifel has paid or is on the hook for more than $230 million in damages and settlements tied to his former clients, according to InvestmentNews, with roughly 15 customer claims still pending.
Roberts is a 35-year industry veteran and former financial advisor who was based in Miami and ran a Stifel-affiliated practice, the CR Wealth Management Group, in Miami and New York. He joined Stifel in 2016, according to AdvisorHub, and his structured-note strategy led to a record arbitration award and a long string of investor complaints. He resigned from Stifel in June 2025 and consented to a FINRA bar the following month after declining to appear for on-the-record testimony in the regulator’s investigation.
Because new awards and settlements continue to be reported, the figures below are stated “as of” the date of their source. This page is updated as new data appears, so readers get one consolidated resource instead of piecing it together from scattered news coverage.
What Are Stifel Structured Notes? Why They Sit at the Center of the Chuck Roberts Claims
Structured notes are complex, often illiquid debt instruments whose returns are tied to the performance of an underlying asset such as a market index, a basket of stocks, or a single equity. They’re frequently marketed for enhanced yield, but they carry principal-loss risk, limited liquidity, and exposure to the credit of the issuing bank. For many retail investors, the embedded features of a structured note are hard to evaluate without specialized disclosure, and the security’s payoff can hinge on conditions that aren’t clear at the time of purchase.
Structured notes are a recurring source of FINRA arbitration claims for reasons that apply to the product generally, not to any one advisor: unsuitability relative to a client’s risk tolerance, overconcentration of a portfolio in a single strategy, and inadequate disclosure of principal and liquidity risk. These are the same themes running through the Roberts claims, where investors allege that their Stifel accounts were overconcentrated in structured notes and that the attendant risks weren’t adequately disclosed.
Common structured-note risk factors include:
Principal risk (investors can lose part or all of their invested capital)
Liquidity risk (notes are often difficult to sell before maturity)
Issuer credit risk (repayment depends on the solvency of the issuing bank)
Complexity and suitability (payoff terms can be hard to parse and unsuitable for conservative investors)
For a broader explanation of these claims, see how our structured notes attorneys represent investors in structured note and structured product claims. Many of the Roberts matters involve products in the autocallable structured products family, among the most frequently misrepresented securities sold to retail investors.
How much has Stifel paid in Chuck Roberts-related settlements?
As of late September 2026, Stifel has paid or faces liability for more than $230 million tied to former clients of Roberts, according to a tally by InvestmentNews of his BrokerCheck record. That figure continues to rise as new settlements are reported.
Stifel Roberts Lawsuit Timeline: Settlements, Awards & Pending Claims
The litigation tied to Roberts began to build in late 2022 and accelerated sharply in 2024 and 2025. In October 2024, a FINRA arbitration panel ordered Stifel to pay roughly $14.3 million to a pair of investors over Roberts’ structured-note recommendations, according to Financial Planning. The following month, a separate panel issued a $2.4 million award over the same strategy, per Financial Planning.
The defining event came on March 12, 2025, when an arbitration panel handed down a $132.5 million award to the Jannetti family. According to Stifel’s Form 10-K, that award comprised approximately $26.5 million in compensatory damages, $79.5 million in punitive damages, and $26.5 million in attorneys’ fees and costs, in favor of four family members over structured-note investments. A series of large settlements followed, and reporting from InvestmentNews shows the cumulative tab moving past the $200 million mark and, by late September 2026, past $230 million.
Stifel Structured Note Settlement Running Tally
Date | Claimant(s) / Case | Amount | Type | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Oct 2024 | Two investors | ~$14.3M | Arbitration award | |
Nov 2024 | Investors | $2.4M | Arbitration award | |
Mar 12, 2025 | Jannetti family (four members) | $132.5M | FINRA arbitration award; award affirmed in federal court; later resolved by confidential settlement (amount undisclosed). | |
Apr 21, 2025 | Investors | $16M | Settlement | |
May 20, 2025 | Investors | $13.5M | Settlement | |
Aug 2025 | Investors | $10.25M | Settlement | |
Sep 2025 | Three investor claims | ~$3.4M | Settlements | |
Dec 5, 2025 | One investor group | $850K | Settlement | |
May 2026 | One investor | $3M | Settlement | |
Sep 2026 | One investor | $30M | Settlement | |
Total to date: more than $230M (reported, per InvestmentNews, Sept 30, 2026) | ||||
New awards and settlements continue to be reported. Readers tracking the matter should check back for updates as fresh FINRA awards post to BrokerCheck.
The $132.5 Million Jannetti Arbitration Award Explained
The Jannetti award is the largest single item in the Roberts matter. On March 12, 2025, a three-person FINRA arbitration panel entered a $132.5 million award against Stifel’s brokerage subsidiary in favor of four members of the Jannetti family, arising from their structured-note investments. According to Stifel’s Form 10-K, the award consisted of approximately $26.5 million in compensatory damages, $79.5 million in punitive damages, and $26.5 million in attorneys’ fees and costs.
Stifel moved to vacate the award. The 10-K reports that a magistrate judge recommended denying that petition on February 6, 2026, and WealthManagement reported in March 2026 that a federal judge adopted the recommendation and affirmed the award. In April 2026, the Jannetti claimants notified the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida that a settlement had been reached in principle. WealthManagement reported in May 2026 that Stifel reached a confidential agreement and that the family filed a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice. The settlement amount has not been disclosed.
What should I do if I lost money in Stifel structured notes recommended by Chuck Roberts?
Review your account statements to confirm your structured-note holdings and losses, check Roberts’ disclosure history on FINRA BrokerCheck, and consult a securities arbitration attorney about your FINRA arbitration options. An attorney can assess whether the facts support a claim against Stifel for the conduct alleged in the existing cases.
Chuck Roberts Stifel Structured Notes: Common Investor Allegations
The claims brought against Stifel in connection with Roberts share a consistent set of allegations. Across the pending and resolved cases, investors have alleged:
Overconcentration (portfolios loaded disproportionately into structured notes)
Unsuitable recommendations (strategies inconsistent with a client’s stated risk profile or age)
Misrepresentation of risk (failure to disclose principal-loss and liquidity exposure)
Failure to supervise (claims that Stifel didn’t adequately oversee the strategy)
Breach of fiduciary duty (and related negligence, fraud, and breach of contract theories)
Many of these cases also cite violations of Regulation Best Interest and the Florida Securities and Investor Protection Act. The specific disclosures are reflected in Roberts’ FINRA BrokerCheck record, which investors can review directly.
Broadly, an investor may have grounds to evaluate a claim if they held Stifel structured notes recommended by Roberts and suffered losses as a result. Whether a particular account presents a viable claim depends on the facts.
Is Chuck Roberts Still a Registered Broker?
No. Chuck Roberts was barred from the securities industry by FINRA in July 2025 and is no longer a registered broker. The bar followed his decision not to continue cooperating with a FINRA investigation, per AdvisorHub, into whether his structured-product recommendations were in his clients’ best interests and whether he had inaccurately described the products; he had initially cooperated but later declined to appear for additional on-the-record testimony.
A FINRA bar means Roberts can’t associate with, or work as a registered representative at, any FINRA member firm in any capacity. For the authoritative, live-status record, including registration history and customer-dispute disclosures, investors can look up his CRD number on FINRA BrokerCheck, the industry’s public database.
Why Bakhtiari & Harrison Is Tracking This Case
Bakhtiari & Harrison maintains this page as a running tracker rather than a one-off recap. The firm was founded by Ryan Bakhtiari and David Harrison, who together bring an institutional understanding of FINRA arbitration.
Ryan Bakhtiari served from 2013 to 2017 as Chairman of the FINRA National Arbitration and Mediation Committee (NAMC), the body that writes the rules governing FINRA arbitration, and as President of the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association from 2011 to 2012.
David Harrison brings a three-phase career to the firm: a Series 7-licensed registered representative at Shearson Lehman Brothers, an assistant district attorney in New York City, where he prosecuted financial fraud, and in-house counsel at Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, where he defended the firm against investor and regulatory claims.
Unlike the single-incident news coverage and standalone blog posts that dominate the search results for this case, this page consolidates the full chronology (the Jannetti award, the settlements, and the pending claims) into one continuously maintained resource. The firm handles investor matters on a contingency fee basis: no recovery, no fee.
How many pending claims are there against Stifel tied to Roberts?
As of late September 2026, roughly 15 customer claims remained pending, seeking approximately $16.5 million in combined damages, according to AdvisorHub reporting on Roberts’ BrokerCheck record. The count has fluctuated as new claims are filed and others settle.
Related Stifel & Structured Note Resources
For broader Stifel broker misconduct claims beyond the Roberts case, see our Stifel Nicolaus investment lawyers page. This page functions as a Roberts-specific tracker; that page is the firm-wide hub for claims involving Stifel Nicolaus more generally.