NY Judge removes ex-OANDA CEO Ed Eger from list of defendants in civil case
When the case, brought by former OANDA customer Antonio Medina, was pending in the Northern District of California, the plaintiff’s request to join Ed Eger as a defendant was denied.
Ed Eger, former Chief Executive Officer of OANDA Corporation, is no longer on the list of the defendants in a case brought by Antonio Medina, ex-customer of OANDA.
Earlier this week, Judge John G. Koeltl at the New York Southern District Court, issued an Order to the Clerk to terminate Mr Eger as a defendant in this action. The reason for the Order is that when the case was pending in the Northern District of California, Judge Davila denied the plaintiff’s request to amend his complaint to join Ed Eger.
The legal action, captioned Medina v. OANDA Corporation (1:17-cv-02316), accuses the defendants of: (1) breach of warranty; (2) false advertising; (3) breach of oral contract; (4) breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (5) breach of fiduciary duty; (6) fraud; and (7) infliction of emotional distress.
In its earlier reply to Mr Medina’s complaint, OANDA has noted that “Nowhere in the amended complaint did Medina plead the existence of a contract into which he entered specifically with Edmond Eger, nor that Eger owed any special duty to Medina. Consequently, the causes of action against Eger fail to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.”
According to Mr Medina’s complaint, OANDA charged him with fictitious interest for non-existing money and did not provide the competitive spreads that it promised, but instead expanded it beyond the competition’s.
Starting on or around August 2015, the complaint says, the Defendants have failed to provide competent service, failing to follow Mr Medina’s trade instructions. Plaintiff received either no response or unresponsive emails, when he attempted to contact the broker. Moreover, Defendants promised that OANDA’s exchange prices, quotes and spread were transparent and that they would provide historical data with at least one minute accuracy spanning many years back but allegedly failed to do so.
Also, Mr Medina claims that as a result of the Defendants’ acts and omissions, he suffered mental anguish, and emotional and physical distress.
OANDA has sought to rebuff these allegations. The company has argued that:
“The Defendant is not liable as Plaintiff’s account was a purely self-directed account and not subject to any trading authority or advisory oversight whatsoever on the part of Oanda. Oanda’s fx trade platform is an automated trade matching system which provided Medina direct access to prices and liquidity originating with a variety of third parties. Oanda had no fiduciary or other duty with respect to Medina’s trading decisions.”
The case continues at the New York Southern District Court.
