This case involves a former investment adviser representative (IAR) of the defendant’s company. The defendant’s company and plaintiff had been working together for over 20 years when the plaintiff informed the defendant that a long-term illness had put her in serious financial trouble. She told the defendant she intended to transfer upwards of $100 million in assets from the defendant’s clients to a new platform and charge clients a significantly higher percentage on this new platform. In response to this, the defendant sent letters to clients that had been solicited by the plaintiff informing them of the plaintiff’s plans and advising that it was not in their best interests to move to the new platform. The plaintiff sued the defendant for defamation because of the letters the defendant sent. It is alleged that the defendant’s company had a fiduciary duty to advise its clients as to what was in their best interests. Because the defendant and plaintiff had been working together for so long, the defendant company intended to clarify to its clients that plaintiff was no longer acting on behalf of their company. An expert in fiduciary duty was sought to discuss whether the defendant complied with their fiduciary duty as a registered investment advisor.