Court Grants TRO Against Former Fidelity Vice President

​A federal judge in Illinois has granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Adam Ritter, a former Vice President and Financial Consultant at Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC, in a dispute over client information and solicitation.

The order was issued on August 21, 2025, by Judge Andrea R. Wood of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Fidelity alleged in its complaint that Ritter resigned from the firm in December 2024 and later joined competitors NewEdge Capital Group and Cubit Wealth Management in April 2025.

According to Fidelity, Ritter memorized client names and contact details while still employed and then reconstructed a list of customers after his departure. The firm stated that several of its customers later reported receiving text messages from Ritter, who was seeking their business at his new firms. Although Fidelity said it had no evidence that Ritter physically removed documents or electronic files, it argued that memorization of such information still qualified as misappropriation.

The company contends that Ritter's actions breached his post-employment restrictive covenant, violated the Illinois Uniform Trade Secrets Act and the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act, and contravened Illinois common law. Fidelity asked the court to act quickly to prevent further solicitation.

Judge Wood agreed that the company had satisfied the requirements for a TRO. The order bars Ritter from using or disclosing customer data, including names, addresses, phone numbers, and financial information, and from soliciting Fidelity clients he had served during his tenure. However, Ritter is permitted to continue serving customers who have already moved their accounts to him at NewEdge or Cubit, as long as he provides Fidelity with a list of those clients.

In accordance with Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fidelity must post a bond to cover potential damages if the restraint is later found to be wrongful. Ritter proposed $100,000, which the court found reasonable. Fidelity is therefore required to deposit that amount in cash or as a surety bond with the court.