How we calculate our investment fraud success rate
Haselkorn & Thibaut, P.A., operating as Investment Fraud Lawyers, reports a 98% success rate across the cases we have resolved. This page explains exactly how that figure is calculated, what it includes, and what it does not. We publish this methodology so that prospective clients, referring attorneys, and researchers can evaluate our track record with full transparency.
defining “success”
We define a successful outcome as any of the following:
- Settlement: A negotiated resolution reached before an arbitration hearing, where the client receives monetary compensation or another tangible benefit.
- Arbitration award: A decision by a FINRA arbitration panel in the client’s favor, resulting in a monetary award.
- Favorable pre-filing resolution: A resolution achieved before a formal claim is filed with FINRA, typically through direct negotiations with the broker-dealer, resulting in compensation or account remediation for the client.
A case is not counted as successful if the outcome is a defense verdict, a dismissed claim, or a settlement that fails to provide any monetary or remedial benefit to the client. Cases where the client voluntarily withdraws before resolution are excluded from the calculation entirely, as explained below.
the denominator: cases resolved
Our 98% success rate uses resolved cases as the denominator. A resolved case is one that has reached a final outcome through one of the three categories listed above, or through a defense verdict, dismissal, or other terminal disposition.
We do not use cases accepted or cases filed as the denominator, because those figures would distort the rate in two important ways:
- Cases accepted but not filed: Some potential clients complete an intake review but are not offered representation. Others are offered representation but choose not to proceed. Including these would artificially inflate the denominator and understate our effectiveness.
- Cases filed but still pending: Including active cases in the denominator would penalize our current rate for matters that have not yet had time to reach resolution. Pending cases are tracked separately and are added to the calculation only once they conclude.
For clarity, the table below shows how the categories relate to one another.
| Category | Description | Included in success rate? |
|—|—|—|
| Cases reviewed | All matters evaluated during intake | No — includes cases declined and cases where the prospective client did not retain us |
| Cases accepted | Matters where a representation agreement was signed | No — may include cases still pending |
| Cases filed | Matters where a FINRA complaint or pre-filing demand was made | Partially — includes resolved and pending cases |
| Cases resolved | Matters with a final, terminal outcome | Yes — this is the denominator |
outcome data
The following table summarizes the outcomes of cases resolved by our firm over the reporting period.
| Outcome category | Number of cases | Percentage of resolved cases |
|—|—|—|
| Settlement | 264 | 62% |
| Arbitration award (favorable) | 104 | 24% |
| Favorable pre-filing resolution | 52 | 12% |
| Defense verdict / dismissal / unfavorable outcome | 9 | 2% |
| Total resolved | 429 | 100% |
The success rate of 98% is derived from the sum of settlements, favorable arbitration awards, and favorable pre-filing resolutions divided by total resolved cases: (264 + 104 + 52) ÷ 429 = 97.9%, which we round to 98%.
limitations and exclusions
No statistic tells the whole story. We want prospective clients to understand the limitations of this figure.
Cases that settle early. Cases resolved through favorable pre-filing resolutions are included in the success rate. These tend to involve clear liability and smaller claim amounts. While they count as successes, they may not require the same level of litigation effort as contested arbitration. We include them because they produce a tangible benefit for the client.
Cases still pending. As of the most recent reporting date, our firm has a number of cases that are actively in progress. These could resolve favorably or unfavorably. We exclude them until they conclude, which means our success rate could shift in future reporting periods. We believe this is the most honest approach.
Cases declined after review. Our firm evaluates every potential matter carefully. We decline cases where the facts do not support a viable claim, where damages are too speculative, or where jurisdictional issues make recovery unlikely. This screening process means the cases we accept tend to have stronger factual foundations, which contributes to our success rate. Prospective clients should understand that we are selective about the matters we take on.
Voluntary withdrawals. If a client chooses to withdraw a case before resolution and against our advice, that case is excluded from the denominator entirely. If our firm withdraws from a case due to a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship or non-cooperation, that case is also excluded. Withdrawals represent a very small percentage of our total docket.
Non-monetary terms. Some resolutions include non-monetary terms such as account reinstatement, removal of adverse notations, or other remedial actions. We count these as successes only when they provide a clear, measurable benefit to the client.
comparison with FINRA arbitration statistics
External benchmarks help contextualize any law firm’s results. According to FINRA’s most recent annual arbitration report, investors prevailed in whole or in part in approximately 51% of cases that went to a hearing. Many additional cases settle before hearing, but FINRA does not publish a comprehensive settlement success rate because most settlements are confidential.
Our firm’s arbitration hearing win rate exceeds the FINRA average. We attribute this difference to careful case selection, thorough preparation, and the fact that our attorneys previously defended broker-dealers on Wall Street — experience that gives us insight into how the other side builds its case.
It is important to note that FINRA’s published statistics cover all investor claims, including those brought by unrepresented investors and those involving smaller or less complex matters. Our firm’s caseload tends to involve claims with larger dollar amounts and more complex fact patterns, which may differ from the overall FINRA docket.
why transparency matters
Investors who have lost money to fraud face a difficult choice when selecting legal counsel. They are often vulnerable, uncertain, and unfamiliar with the securities arbitration process. A high success rate can be reassuring, but only if it is honest and verifiable.
We publish this methodology because we believe investors deserve to understand what a statistic actually measures. A percentage without context can mislead. A percentage with full disclosure empowers informed decision-making.
If you are considering our firm for representation, we encourage you to ask questions about this data. We are happy to discuss our track record, our case selection process, and how our experience may apply to your situation. Consultations are free and confidential.
Transparency is not just a marketing position. It is a professional obligation. We take that obligation seriously, and we believe our results speak for themselves when presented with the context and candor that every investor deserves.