Walter David Nagle (CRD #2208043) Has Customer Dispute Disclosures on FINRA BrokerCheck
Walter David Nagle (CRD #2208043) has been the subject of disclosure events reported on Walter David Nagle’s FINRA BrokerCheck. According to Walter David Nagle’s FINRA BrokerCheck report accessed on January 14, 2026, Walter David Nagle has been the subject of four customer dispute disclosures. If you invested with Walter David Nagle and you have concerns about his activity, keep reading.
BrokerCheck link: BrokerCheck
BrokerCheck report: BrokerCheck Report (PDF)
Investor disputes / customer complaints
Walter Nagle’s FINRA BrokerCheck report reflects four customer dispute disclosures. Below are two examples:
Example 1 (Pending): Walter Nagle’s FINRA BrokerCheck report reflects a customer dispute received on December 8, 2025. The disclosure lists allegations of breach of contract; violation of federal securities laws; violation of Illinois securities law; violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act; and common law fraud. The product type is listed as Other: GWG L Bonds, and alleged damages are listed as $50,000. The disclosure also lists the forum as FINRA with docket/case number 25-02610 and a filing date of November 28, 2025.
Example 2 (Settled): Walter Nagle’s FINRA BrokerCheck report reflects a customer dispute received on August 7, 2024. The disclosure lists allegations of breach of fiduciary duty; negligence and negligent misrepresentation; breach of contract; failure to supervise; and violation of Regulation Best Interest. The product type is listed as Other: GWG L Bonds, and alleged damages are listed as $75,000. The disclosure lists the forum as FINRA with docket/case number 24-01662 and a filing date of August 1, 2024. The matter was settled for $22,500 (with $18,000 listed as Walter Nagle’s individual contribution amount), and the status date is listed as October 15, 2025. Walter Nagle’s BrokerCheck report also includes a broker statement in which Walter Nagle states he vigorously denies the allegations against him.
In addition to the two examples above, Walter Nagle’s FINRA BrokerCheck report reflects two other customer dispute disclosures.
Rule summary #1: FINRA Rule 3110
FINRA Rule 3110 requires member firms to establish and maintain a supervisory system that is reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and regulations and FINRA rules. This rule is often implicated when a customer dispute alleges a failure to supervise.
Rule summary #2: FINRA Rule 2010
FINRA Rule 2010 is a broad, principles-based rule requiring high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. FINRA frequently references Rule 2010 in matters involving alleged misconduct or unethical sales practices.
Why this matters to investors (Regulation Best Interest)
Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) is a U.S. securities regulation designed to strengthen the standard of conduct that broker-dealers owe to retail investors when making recommendations about securities transactions or investment strategies. Adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and effective as of June 30, 2020, Reg BI aims to enhance investor protection while preserving investor access to brokerage products and services.
Reg BI requires broker-dealers and financial advisors to act in the best interest of the retail customer at the time a recommendation is made, and not to place their own financial or other interests ahead of the customer’s. This represents a higher standard than the historical “suitability” requirement, which only required that recommendations be suitable, not necessarily optimal or conflict-free.
Reg BI is built around four key obligations:
- Disclosure Obligation – Broker-dealers must disclose material facts about the relationship and recommendations, including fees, scope of services, and conflicts of interest.
- Care Obligation – Recommendations must be made with reasonable diligence, care, and skill, considering costs, risks, and alternatives.
- Conflict of Interest Obligation – Firms must identify, disclose, and mitigate or eliminate conflicts, particularly those that create incentives to favor one product over another.
- Compliance Obligation – Firms must establish policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance with Reg BI as a whole.
Importantly, Reg BI applies at the recommendation level, not as a continuous duty like the fiduciary standard applicable to registered investment advisers. Still, it significantly narrows the gap by emphasizing cost considerations, conflict management, and investor-focused decision-making.
Overall, Regulation Best Interest seeks to promote transparency, improve the quality of investment recommendations, and reinforce trust between retail investors and broker-dealers in the U.S. securities markets.
Background information (from BrokerCheck)
Based on his BrokerCheck Report, Walter Nagle reportedly:
- Is currently employed by and registered with Ausdal Financial Partners, Inc. (registered since July 7, 2011).
- Has passed the Series 26, SIE, Series 22, Series 62, Series 6, and Series 63 exams.
- Was previously registered with firms that include Workman Securities Corporation, Ameritas Investment Corp., and Mutual of Omaha Investor Services, Inc.
Kurta Law Can Help
If you have worked with Walter Nagle and you have concerns about his activity, Kurta Law may be able to help you evaluate potential recovery options. You may be entitled to pursue a claim through FINRA arbitration, depending on the facts of your situation and the investments involved. Contact Kurta Law at 877-600-0098 or info@kurtalawfirm.com for a free consultation.
Helpful resources: Unsuitable Investments | Stockbroker Fraud
For nearly 20 years, Kurta Law has advocated for investors and helped hold financial professionals accountable—because investors should not have to sit quietly while alleged misconduct and securities fraud go unchecked. Start your recovery process today.