Amid the carnage on Wall Street, two Atlanta law firms—Sutherland and Rogers & Hardin—may be keeping a particularly close watch on Bank of America’s surprise acquisition of Merrill Lynch.

Both Sutherland and Rogers & Hardin have historically performed a “significant” amount of work for Merrill in the area of broker-dealer arbitration, said RobbinsLaw founding partner Richard Robbins, who in May left Sutherland after 27 years. Robbins said he has represented Merrill in litigation, but that the Wall Street firm isn’t a current client.

It will probably be at least a year before Bank of America reviews the law firms that conduct work for Merrill, Robbins said, because Bank of America will have higher priorities in managing the integration of Merrill.

Sutherland partner Terry Weiss, who chairs the firm’s broker-dealer litigation and arbitration practice group, declined to comment on the Bank of America-Merrill deal or on how it might affect his law firm. Rogers & Hardin managing partner Steve Leeds could not be reached for comment.

Sutherland has represented Merrill in at least 44 broker-dealer arbitration cases, according to a news item on the law firm’s Web site.

In one case, Sutherland defended Merrill in a $6 million claim brought by a retired lawyer against Merrill and Smith Barney. A New York Stock Exchange panel denied all of the retired lawyer’s claims. Sutherland said it was the firm’s “44th zero result” for Merrill. Goodfriend v. Merrill Lynch, No. 2004-015309 (NYSE, Jan. 9, 2007).

Additionally, lawyers from Sutherland’s Washington office have advised Merrill on securities offerings and in regulatory matters concerning life insurance and annuity products, according to Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

As for Rogers & Hardin, a partner at that firm, Brett Rogers, represented Merrill in a 2007 case in which a profit-sharing plan trustee and a shareholder of the plan filed a tort action against Merrill. Hedquist v. Merrill Lynch, No. A06A1785 (Ga. Ct. of Appeals).

The volume of work in the area of broker-dealer arbitration tends to trail the market by a couple of years, with a bear market producing an increased number of cases and vice-versa, Robbins said.  Thus, the level of activity in broker-dealer arbitration is currently low, reflecting the last bull market. But the current bear market should produce an up-tick in broker-dealer cases in coming years, he said.

“When people lose money, they blame their broker,” Robbins said.