Edwin Barkel, Lewis Roca Photo

Edwin A. Barkel

  • LinkedIn
  • Print PDF
  • vCard

Ed brings a first-hand knowledge of business-based experience to craft legal strategies that advance his client’s business.

Ed Barkel is the lead partner in the firm’s Securities Litigation and Broker-Dealers Litigation Practice Group. He defends broker-dealers and individual brokers in arbitrations and litigated matters. A significant portion of his practice is devoted to defending independent financial services firms and their advisors. He also provides consulting services in compliance-related matters, including supervisory system design, special investigations, special supervision programs, branch office examinations, and regulatory mandated consulting. His securities industry background enables him to offer unique “insider” insight, knowledge, experience, and understanding to clients.

Ed is also a partner in the firm’s Litigation Practice Group and is a member of the firm's Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. He regularly advises broker-dealers, investment advisors, and insurance companies on privacy under Regulation S.P. He also consults with and advises clients about data privacy and security matters. He guides clients through increasingly complex regulatory and statutory requirements for collecting, processing, and protecting personal information. Furthermore, Ed helps clients implement and enforce privacy policies and properly respond to data security incidents.

Ed worked for eight years in the securities industry before joining Lewis Roca in 2002. He has been senior vice president, general counsel, and chief compliance officer for a mid-sized broker-dealer, and prior to reentering private practice, was the associate general counsel and an assistant director of compliance at SunAmerica Securities, Inc. He also spent two years as a securities registered representative before moving into management.

Ed has held several securities licenses including, NASD Series 7, 24, 63 and 65. He has also held life, health, and variable insurance licenses and has acted as an expert witness in securities arbitration matters.

Prior to entering the securities industry, he spent six years in private practice concentrating on mergers and acquisitions, general corporate matters, securities, and litigation.

Personal Approach

Often the first to proactively identify an issue before it becomes a problem, Ed’s clients value his creative problem solving abilities and direct communication style. He is personable, accessible, and engaging. Building relationships with his clients is one of the highlights of Ed’s practice.

Ed was not one of those kids who decided to be a lawyer at age five. It wasn’t even a career he considered until a high school teacher recognized his aptitude for business and understanding of the law. Ed chose a law school that offered a dual JD/MBA program. This turned out to be one of the smartest decisions he has ever made.

On the weekends, Ed can be found outdoors exploring “America’s best kept secret” also known as Arizona.

Ed provides mediation services for a broad range of disputes. Ed’s experience in the mediation process began in 1990 when he began serving as a volunteer mediator for the Toledo Ohio Municipal Court Citizens Dispute Settlement program. The program provides an opportunity for parties to resolve the underlying personal dispute that brought the parties to court rather than proceeding through the criminal court process. Ed’s role was not to decide who was right, wrong or who caused the dispute. Instead, as a neutral, he helped the parties negotiate their own binding resolution of the underlying dispute. Ed has carried that experience over to the mediation of civil matters.  Ed applies a mix of evaluative and facilitative mediation styles to aid the parties reach a settlement. He is available for in person or Zoom mediations. For the last 20 years Ed has litigated disputes between customers and their financial advisors. He has participated in over 200 mediations as in-house counsel and as outside counsel.

Ed is mediator certified by Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, the International Mediation Institute and the Phoenix Dispute Solutions. He is also certified by the EDR Institute for early dispute resolution process. EDR is a 30-60 day process during which the mediator facilitates the engagement in principled negotiation using a four step process: (i) initial dispute assessment, (ii) information and document exchange (including experts if needed), (iii) risk analysis and (iv) dispute resolution, including a traditional mediation of the dispute if necessary.

More About Edwin A. Barkel


  • J.D., University of Detroit, Mercy School of Law, Order of Barristers, 1988
  • M.B.A., University of Detroit, Mercy School of Law, 1988
  • B.A., Hope College, 1984

Bar Admissions

  • Arizona, 2002
  • Ohio, 1988


  • Member Broker-Dealer Investment Advisor Consortium
  • PLUS Professional Liability Underwriters Society, Member
  • Financial Planning Association, Member
  • Securities Industry Association Compliance and Legal Division, Member

Representative Matters

  • Obtained a full defense award for a national-broker dealer and an insurance advisory service firm in a multi-party FINRA Arbitration filed by wealthy couple and their professional service corporation. The claimants sought to recover $3,000,000 plus prejudgment interest, attorney fees and punitive damages. The claimants alleged that a complex asset protection and retirement income strategy using fixed and variable insurance products was unsuitable. Through extensive discovery and during a two-week arbitration hearing we proved that the claimants had independently engaged in multiple complex tax avoidance and evasion strategies before and during the time frame at issue, they were very litigious and the recommended retirement insurance strategy was suitable.  They panel assessed more than half of the hearing session fees to the claimants.                                                                   
  • Defended a national broker-dealer in a FINRA arbitration filed by an extremely wealthy individual through his offshore creditor protection trust and its asset protection sub-entities. The claimants sought to recover $650,000 related to a bad loan that one of the sub-entities made to an approved OBA insurance agency owned by an independent contractor registered representative. The claimants alleged that the broker-dealer failed to supervise the loan transaction between the asset protection entity and the OBA entity. The asset protection trust and its sub-entities tried to bootstrap “customer status” based upon a variable annuity transaction the wealthy individual directed between yet another asset protection trust (not a claimant) and the firm several years prior.                        
  • Proved that the trustee, the trust and the sub-entities did not have an agreement to arbitrate, did not have an account, contracted only with the outside OBA entity not associated with the firm and the OBA insurance activity was not the business of the broker-dealer. As a result, claimants did not meet the very broad definition of a “customer” eligible to compel arbitration under FINRA Rule 12200 and FINRA therefore lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate the case. We also argued on the merits that, under FINRA Rule 12504(a)(6)(B), the firm was not involved in the transaction at issue. The arbitrators agreed with both arguments, dismissed the claims, and ordered claimants to pay the forum fees.       
  • Represented a national broker-dealer in a dispute brought by a family group of investors in an arbitration in the FINRA Dispute Resolution forum. The claimants sought $770,000 plus lawyer fees and punitive damages. The investment activity spanned from 2007 to 2015. Claimants alleged that the investment portfolio was unsuitable, did not meet their investment objectives, and the firm failed to supervise the broker. Through extensive discovery we were able to prove that members of the investors group concurrently engaged in identical investment strategies in self-directed accounts at other financial services firms and they engaged in similar investment activity after leaving Stifel. Through careful cross examination we were able to impeach all members of the investment group and also prove that one member of the investment group misrepresented profits and losses to other members of the group in order to continue the trading strategy he sought. The arbitrators rendered a full defense award to our client including an unusual order requiring the investor group to share half of the FINRA Arbitration Forum fees.                                                                   
  • Represented a national broker-dealer in two interrelated matters arising out of the hiring and subsequent termination of a registered representative. In the first case, the former employer sued our client and the employee in state court alleging the theft of trade secrets, theft of confidential data protected under of Regulation S.P., tortious interference of business opportunities, and other claims. The plaintiffs sought $10 million plus lawyer fees and punitive damages. The plaintiff’s case, counter claims, and defenses involved complex issues related to standing, violations of securities law and claims for recovery barred as a matter of law and public policy. The matter was settled favorably for our client and the claims were dismissed with prejudice. The second claim was brought by the terminated broker. His claims involved complex Whistle blower issues, damages in excess of $500,000, and avoidance of a $850,000 promissory note balance. Our client filed a counterclaim seeking repayment of the promissory note. The matter was settled favorably with a recovery on the promissory note and without the payment of damages by our client.                                               
  • Represented a national insurance company and its employees in a dispute brought by a couple seeking guaranteed annual income payments from a life insurance policy totaling $93,750 “for life” over a mortality period ranging from 25-40 years. The actuarial value of the benefit sought was $2.5 million to $4 million. Plaintiffs also sought to hold individual employees liable for the life-time income stream and to permanently impact the employees’ ability to work in the financial services industry. The litigation was hotly disputed requiring multiple motions to compel discovery. We were able to negotiate a settlement in which no compensatory damages were paid by the company or the employees. Further, we were able to get the claims expunged from the records of the individuals registered with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. 

Honors & Recognitions

  • The Best Lawyers in America, 2022 "Lawyer of the Year," Woodward/White, Aiken, S.C., Commercial Litigation and Securities Litigation, 2013-2024
  • Martindale-Hubbell, "AV/Preeminent Attorney" Rating



  • Annuities 101: Everything You Don't Understand, ABA TIPS Midwinter Conference, 2019
  • New and Emerging Trends in Cyber, Professional Liability Underwriting Society's Southwest Chapter, Southwest Chapter Cyber Seminar, 2018
  • Elder Financial Abuse and Exploitation - Protecting Clients and Avoiding Liability, National Educational Conference, NEXT Financial Group, 2015
  • On the Record Interviews, Woodbury Investments Regional Manager Meeting, 2011
  • FINRA Arbitration Update, Securities Regulation Section of the State Bar of Arizona, 2011
  • Hot Topics for In-House Counsel in Evolving Regulatory Landscape, Lewis and Roca Year-End CLE for In-House Counsel, 2011
  • Current Issues In Securities Arbitration, Scottsdale Insurance Underwriters, 2009
  • Securities Arbitration, Regulatory Issues and Claim avoidance, United Planners Annual Partners Conference, 2009
  • Business Succession Planning, FPA of Greater Phoenix, 2008
  • Business Succession Planning, Society of Financial Service Professionals, 2006
  • Business Succession Planning, Carillon Investments National Conference, 2004
  • Investment Advisor Regulatory Update, FPA of Greater Phoenix, 2004
  • Annual Firm Element Compliance Program, Wachovia Securities Phoenix Complex, 2003
  • Suitability Conference, National Regulatory Service, 2002
  • Annual Firm Element Compliance Program, Wachovia Securities Phoenix Complex, 2002 
Jump to Page

How Can We
Help You?

By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.