Skip to content
View of the Chicago skyline
Peter E. Cooper

Peter E. Cooper

  • AV Preeminent™ Peer Review Rating (Martindale Hubbell)
  • 2020 Leading LawyerSM in Commercial Litigation (Law Bulletin Publishing)
  • 2019 Frank H. T. Rhodes Exemplary Alumni Service Award (Cornell University)

Peter E. Cooper joined Lawrence Kamin over two decades ago, after positions with a Chicago securities litigation boutique and two diversified New York law firms. Peter’s practice includes representing institutions (broker-dealers, investment advisers and banks) and financial professionals in customer litigation and arbitration, restrictive covenant and trade secret disputes, and in regulatory investigations and enforcement proceedings before the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators. He also represents both plaintiffs and defendants in non-securities litigation, ranging from business torts and breaches of contract to trust and estates disputes.

Peter strives to bring three essential attributes to all client matters: a commitment to listening; proficiency in structuring and simplifying complex legal and economic arguments; and an appreciation for the value of clients’ financial and human resources. Recognizing that most clients are not in the business of litigating, Peter understands that success cannot be measured merely by courtroom victories, but in accomplishing clients’ business and legal objectives, while not overwhelming their daily lives and professions.

An adjunct professor at the IIT Chicago-Kent School of Law, Peter previously served as the chair of the Securities Litigation and Enforcement Subcommittee of the Chicago Bar Association Securities Law Committee. Peter remains active in the Chicago Lincoln American Inn of Court, and has published a variety of articles on dispute resolution and securities and future regulation.

Peter and his wife live in Glen Ellyn, Illinois, where he has served as elected Village Trustee, and remains active in the community. A life-long sports fan, Peter prides himself on having taught one of his four children how to keep score at a baseball game.

Bar Admissions

  • State of Illinois
  • State of New York

Court Admissions

  • United States District Courts
    • Northern and Central Districts of Illinois
    • Southern, Eastern and Northern Districts of New York
  • United States Courts of Appeals
    • Seventh Circuit
    • Second Circuit

Professional Affiliations

  • American Bar Association
    • Securities Litigation Committee
      • Chair, Alternative Dispute Resolution Securities/FINRA Subcommitee (2019-2020)
    • Securities Arbitration Subcommittee
  • Chicago Bar Association
    • Securities Law Committee
    • Chair, Securities Litigation and Enforcement Subcommittee (1998-1999)
  • Chicago Lincoln Inn of Court, AIC
    • Vice President
  • Illinois Institute of Technology
    • Chicago-Kent College of Law, Adjunct Professor (2007-2016)

Professional Experience

  • Lawrence Kamin, LLC (Chicago, IL)
    • Partner: 2000-Present
    • Associate: 1998-2000
  • Cantwell & Cantwell (Chicago, IL)
    • Associate: 1994-1998
  • Baer Marks & Upham (New York, NY)
    • Associate: 1987-1993
  • Windels, Marx, Davies & Ives (New York, NY)
    • Associate: 1983-1987


  • New York University, J.D., 1984
  • Cornell University, B.A., 1980

Community Service

  • Village of Glen Ellyn, Illinois
    • Village Trustee (2009-2013)
  • National Immigrant Justice Center
  • Cornell University
    • Cornell University Council
      • Member (1987-2018)
      • Life Member (2018- Present)
    • Cornell Alumni Admissions Ambassador Network
      • Chicago-area Chair (1999-2004; 2010- Present)

Narrow construction of restrictive covenant aids financial professional.

Post-employment restrictive covenants proliferate in Illinois, blocking financial professionals from changing employers while continuing to serve their long-established customers. Peter and the litigation group crafted an exit strategy that permitted an established investment advisor representative to contact his existing clients to inform them of his move, and the Illinois Appellate Court confirmed that such contacts would not be deemed a violative solicitation.

Court approves substantial fee for directed trustee based on fee agreement and burden of litigation.

Peter represented a corporate trustee in an action for trustee’s fees in connection with the administration of highly-contested trust dispute. The trust beneficiaries had agreed to the appointment of the trustee, but, a year and a half later, one of the beneficiaries challenged the trustee’s fees. Following a full evidentiary hearing, the probate court awarded the trustee the full amount of the fees it sought, finding that complexity of the ongoing litigation and trust administration resulting from the beneficiary’s own obstreperous behavior warranted substantial compensation, even on “directed” assets.

Arbitration panel rejects claimant’s assertion of unauthorized trading.

Peter helped a broker-dealer successfully defend a customer’s allegations that losses in his account resulted from unauthorized trades. Using the claimant’s cellular phone records and the client’s trading logs, Peter helped establish that the customer’s protests of ignorance of the trades were not credible, resulting in a “zero” award in the broker-dealer’s favor.

SBA Issues New Forms, Guidance to Implement the Flexibility Act

Congress Adopts PPP Flexibility Act of 2020, Easing Loan Terms

SBA Issues Interim Final Rule on PPP Loan Forgiveness

SBA Releases Loan Forgiveness Application, Provides Guidance for Forgiveness

CARES Act: New SBA Guidance on Paycheck Protection Program Certification

Webinar: Understanding CARES Act Stimulus Opportunities for Businesses

CARES Act: SBA Regulatory Guidance for Paycheck Protection Program

FFCRA: Temporary Rule Governing Implementation of Coronavirus Relief Act

CARES Act: Employee Retention Credit and Deferral of Payroll Taxes

The Families First Coronavirus Response Act and the Potential Impact on Small and Mid-sized Businesses

Voluntary Dismissal of Mortgage Foreclosure Case May Preclude Subsequent Action on Promissory Note

Supreme Court Strengthens Protection of “Confidential” Information Under FOIA

Cornell University Bestows Prestigious Service Award to Peter E. Cooper

Weigand v. Nine Fifty, Ltd.: Lack of Video Preservation Exposes Defendant to Spoliation Claim

Supreme Court Holds Annuities Are Not “Securities” Subject to Illinois Securities Department Regulation

Illinois Appellate Court Extends Common Interest Doctrine

FINRA Substantially Revises Customer Arbitration Rules

Securities Mediation: An Alternative Path to Claims Resolution

Broker-Dealer Customer and Recruiting Disputes

State and Federal Court Litigation Involving Futures and Derivatives

FINRA Substantially Revises Customer Arbitration Rules, NSCP Currents, July/August 2007

Securities Mediation: An Alternative Path to Claims Resolution, National Regulatory Services 2006 Compliance Conference

Broker-Dealer Customer and Recruiting Disputes, Glasser LegalWorks, Broker Dealer Litigation

When is an FCM, CTA or Pool a Securities Broker-Dealer, an Investment Adviser or an Investment Company Under the Securities Laws?, Futures & Derivatives Law Report

State and Federal Court Litigation Involving Futures and Derivatives, 8 Securities News, No. 2

Lawrence Kamin maintains this website to provide general information about its services and legal expertise. While we try to keep the information timely and accurate, we make no guarantees. We make every effort to correct errors brought to our attention. Full Disclaimer
† Select attorneys have received this recognition
Website developed in accordance with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.