Citadel asks court to compel Marshall Wace in Shatz dispute

Citadel filed a request in New York seeking a court order to compel Marshall Wace to stop delaying a document search tied to the recruitment of former Citadel portfolio manager Daniel Shatz. A June ruling allowed Citadel to obtain records from Marshall Wace related to Shatz’s 2024 move to the London-based hedge fund, where he became global head of credit.

In papers submitted to Justice Andrea Masley, Citadel said Marshall Wace withheld access to evidence for nearly three months and accused the firm of attempting to “stonewall” its requests. Citadel asked the court to require Marshall Wace to include two senior executives, Anthony Clake and Alan Hofmeyr, in the scope of the document search and to expand the search terms used.

The dispute is tied to parallel proceedings. Shatz began arbitration alleging Citadel retaliated after he raised concerns about potential securities violations and that the firm improperly withheld an eight-figure deferred compensation award. Citadel counters that Shatz forfeited that deferred pay by breaching his employment agreement and by misappropriating confidential information before his departure.

Citadel says the records it seeks concern Shatz’s recruitment and the creation of Marshall Wace’s credit operation. The firm alleges Shatz secured a role at Marshall Wace but accessed and printed confidential Citadel documents before resigning in June 2023 and entering a 15-month gardening leave. Citadel says the materials included recruitment lists, plans for developing a global credit business and candidate evaluation scorecards. Shatz joined Marshall Wace in 2024.

Marshall Wace has resisted searches of communications involving Clake and Hofmeyr, arguing the two are senior leaders who work for a separate UK entity and that their messages may not contain information uniquely relevant to the arbitration. In correspondence cited by Citadel, Marshall Wace’s lawyers wrote that the firm had responded to the subpoenas “with diligence and good faith.” The firm declined to comment for the record.

The court will consider Citadel’s request to compel searches of the executives’ communications and to broaden the search terms. The outcome will determine the scope of records Marshall Wace must produce as the arbitration and related proceedings continue.