LITIGATION	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
LITIGATION	LITIGATION From time to time we are involved as plaintiff or defendant in various legal actions arising in the normal course of business. The Company was named as a defendant in several complaints filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California in January 2017 alleging violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaints were brought as purported class actions on behalf of stockholders who purchased shares of the Company’s common stock between varying dates, inclusive of August 7, 2015 through January 23, 2017. Those actions were consolidated, a lead plaintiff was appointed, and the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint on May 31, 2017. The defendants moved to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint. On September 18, 2017, the district court granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ motions to dismiss. Specifically, the court denied the defendants’ motions as to the Company’s April 15, 2016 Proxy Statement which listed the positions held by Steven A. Sugarman (the Company’s then (now former) Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer) with COR Securities Holdings Inc., COR Clearing LLC, and COR Capital LLC while omitting their alleged connections with Jason Galanis. The Company believes that the action is without merit and intends to vigorously contest it. On September 26, 2017, a shareholder derivative action was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against four of the Company’s directors alleging that they breached their fiduciary duties to the Company. In that action, the Company is a nominal defendant. The complaint seeks monetary and equitable relief on behalf of the Company. The Company believes that the shareholder was required to, but failed to, make a demand on the Company to bring such claims, and that the failure of the shareholder to make a demand requires dismissal of the action. On September 5, 2017, Jeffrey Seabold, a former officer of the Company and the Bank, filed a complaint in the Los Angeles Superior Court against the Company and multiple unnamed defendants asserting claims for breach of contract, wrongful termination, retaliation and unfair business practices. Mr. Seabold alleges that he was constructively terminated as a Company and Bank employee and seeks in excess of $5 million in damages. The Company and the Bank believe that the action is without merit and intend to vigorously contest it.

LITIGATION

From time to time we are involved as plaintiff or defendant in various legal actions arising in the normal course of business. The Company was named as a defendant in several complaints filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California in January 2017 alleging violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaints were brought as purported class actions on behalf of stockholders who purchased shares of the Company’s common stock between varying dates, inclusive of August 7, 2015 through January 23, 2017. Those actions were consolidated, a lead plaintiff was appointed, and the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint on May 31, 2017. The defendants moved to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint. On September 18, 2017, the district court granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ motions to dismiss. Specifically, the court denied the defendants’ motions as to the Company’s April 15, 2016 Proxy Statement which listed the positions held by Steven A. Sugarman (the Company’s then (now former) Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer) with COR Securities Holdings Inc., COR Clearing LLC, and COR Capital LLC while omitting their alleged connections with Jason Galanis. The Company believes that the action is without merit and intends to vigorously contest it.

On September 26, 2017, a shareholder derivative action was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against four of the Company’s directors alleging that they breached their fiduciary duties to the Company. In that action, the Company is a nominal defendant. The complaint seeks monetary and equitable relief on behalf of the Company. The Company believes that the shareholder was required to, but failed to, make a demand on the Company to bring such claims, and that the failure of the shareholder to make a demand requires dismissal of the action.

On September 5, 2017, Jeffrey Seabold, a former officer of the Company and the Bank, filed a complaint in the Los Angeles Superior Court against the Company and multiple unnamed defendants asserting claims for breach of contract, wrongful termination, retaliation and unfair business practices. Mr. Seabold alleges that he was constructively terminated as a Company and Bank employee and seeks in excess of $5 million in damages. The Company and the Bank believe that the action is without merit and intend to vigorously contest it.