Former Financial Advisor Eric Kleiner Barred by FINRA for Alleged Selling Away

• November 6, 2025
• Morgan Stanley

Eric Brian Kleiner (CRD#: 4135180) was a previously registered broker and investment advisor.

Broker’s History

He entered the securities industry in 2000 and worked with Prudential Securities Incorporated; Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC; and Morgan Stanley.

Current and Past Allegations of Conduct Leading to Investment Loss

According to publicly available records released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), in October 2025, Without admitting or denying the findings, Kleiner consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to provide documents and information requested by FINRA during an investigation that originated from its review of the Form U5 filed by his member firm. The finding stated that the firm filed the Form U5 stating that it discharged Kleiner due to concerns related to his recommendation of non-firm approved and firm restricted investments to customers, including ones in which he was also invested, failure to fully disclose outside investment, and use of a personal device to engage in unauthorized disclosure of confidential, internal use only firm information.

As a result, Respondent also consented to the imposition of the following sanctions:

• A bar from associating with any FINRA member in all capacities.

For a copy of the FINRA Disciplinary Details, click here.

In addition, Eric Kleiner has been the subject of nine other FINRA Disclosures:

• July 2025—“ Claimant alleged, inter alia, FA recommended outside investment not authorized by the firm – May 2018 to March 2025.” The customer dispute is still pending.
• May 2025—“ Claimant alleged, inter alia, FA recommended outside investment not authorized by the firm – Sept 2020 to March 2025.” The damage amount requested is $400,000.00 and the customer dispute is still pending.
• April 2025—“ Claimant alleged, inter alia, FA recommended outside investment strategy not authorized by the firm – Nov 2020 to March 2025.” The customer dispute is still pending.
• April 2025—“ Claimant alleged, inter alia, FA recommended outside investment strategy not authorized by the firm.” The customer dispute is still pending.
• April 2025—“ Claimant alleged, inter alia, that the investments strategy executed in the client’s account was unsuitable 2016-2025.” The customer dispute is still pending.
• March 2025—Discharged by MSWM, “Allegations related to recommendations to customers of non-firm approved and firm restricted investments, including ones in which Mr. Kleiner was also invested, failure to fully disclose outside investment, and use of personal device to engage in unauthorized disclosure of confidential, internal use only Firm information.”
• July 2023—“ CLIENT ALLEGED RECOMMENDATIONS TO INVEST IN CANNIBAS SECURITIES WERE UNSUITABLE FOR SOMEONE HIS AGE 2021.” The damage amount requested was $300,000.00 and the customer dispute was denied.
• June 2009—“ FRAUD, OMISSIONS AND MISREPRESENTATIONS, COMMON LAW FRAUD, FRAUDULENT INDUCEMENT, UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF CONTRACT, BREACH OF THE COVENANTS OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING.” The damage amount requested was $226,865.65 and the Panel rendered an award of $90,000.00, plus interest.
• June 2008—“ NY RESIDENT QUESTIONED THE TAX CONSEQUENCES FROM THE SALE OF SOME OF HIS STOCKS. REQUESTED WRITTEN EXPLANATION TO A SERIES OF QUESTIONS REGARDING ADDITIONAL $5,000 TO $10,000 IN ANTICIPATED TAX CONSEQUENCES, AS WELL AS QUESTIONS REGARDING FEES AND COMMISSIONS FROM THE SALE OF HIS STOCKS.” The damage amount requested was $7,500.00 and the customer dispute was denied.

For a copy of Eric Kleiner’s FINRA BrokerCheck, click here.

We Help Investors Recover Investment Losses

Pursuant to FINRA Rule 3270, outside business activities in which Financial Advisors become involved must be disclosed.  FINRA Rule 3280 prohibits Financial Advisors from engaging in Private Securities Transactions, which are securities transactions that take place away from the employing brokerage firm.  The purpose of these rules is to ensure that Financial Advisors do not engage in selling away.  The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) strictly prohibits financial advisors from “selling away” or selling securities and investments to clients that are not offered by the brokerage firm with which they are employed. For example, it is illegal and a violation of industry rules for a financial advisor to recommend or even suggest that a client invest in the financial advisor’s own business or a business operated by his or her friends or family. It is not necessary that the financial advisor earn any compensation for recommending an outside investment.

The purpose behind this prohibition is to ensure that a financial advisor only offers to sell securities that have been vetted by his or her employer brokerage firm through a rigorous due diligence process. Most brokerage firms have an approved list of investments, products, and research that can be provided or made available to clients. Any deviation by the financial advisor from the approved product list may constitute selling away.

Financial advisors have a legal and regulatory obligation to recommend only suitable investments that are appropriate for their clients’ needs and objectives. Their employing brokerage firm has a legal and regulatory obligation to supervise the Financial Advisors’ sales practices and dealings with clients. To the extent any of these duties are breached, the customer may be entitled to a recovery of his or her investment losses.

Reasonable basis suitability requires that a recommended investment or investment strategy be suitable or appropriate for at least some investors. Reasonable basis suitability requires an advisor to conduct adequate due diligence so that he or she can determine the risks and rewards of the investment or investment strategy.

Quantitative suitability requires a brokerage firm or financial advisor with actual or de facto control over a customer’s account to have a reasonable basis for believing that a series of recommended transactions – even if suitable when viewed in isolation – is not excessive and unsuitable for the customer when taken together in light of the customer’s investment profile. No single test defines excessive activity, but factors such as the turnover rate, the cost-equity ratio, and the use of in-and-out trading in a customer’s account may provide a basis for a finding that a member or associated person has violated the quantitative suitability obligation.

Customer-specific suitability requires that a member or associated person have a reasonable basis to believe that the recommendation is suitable for a particular customer based on that customer’s investment profile. Among the criteria that a financial advisor must evaluate to satisfy his or her customer-specific suitability obligations include the investor’s age, tax status, time horizon, liquidity needs, and risk tolerance; a client’s other investments, financial situation and needs, investment objectives, and any other information disclosed by the customer should also be considered.

The Wolper Law Firm represents investors nationwide in securities litigation and arbitration on a contingency fee basis. Matt Wolper, the Managing Principal of the Wolper Law Firm, is a trial lawyer who has handled hundreds of securities cases during his career involving a wide range of products, strategies and securities. Prior to representing investors, he was a partner with a national law firm, where he represented some of the largest banks and brokerage firms in the world in securities matters. We can be reached at (800) 931-8452 or by email at mwolper@wolperlawfirm.com.