Collegiality – The Death of Tenure?

buy cheap doxycycline online cheapest synthroid prices xanax without prescription cheap prozac tablets cheap tramadol acomplia zithromax pharmacy tramadol without a prescription phentermine pills buy generic accutane where to buy cialis cheap zoloft online doxycycline prices cheap generic phentermine nexium online cheap cheap synthroid tablets acomplia online nexium pills buy cheap propecia buy plavix buy diazepam without prescription accutane online stores accutane cheap cheap generic viagra clomid without prescription cheap plavix buy bactrim without prescription tramadol online phentermine without prescription buy synthroid diazepam online stores discount diazepam nexium online stores bactrim online stores order diazepam purchase lasix online purchase lorazepam bactrim prescription buy cheap tramadol zithromax online cheap acomplia generic phentermine plavix for sale cheap plavix tablets cheap tramadol tablets pharmacy lasix lasix sale pharmacy diazepam buy doxycycline accutane prices buy cheap phentermine lasix prices buy cheap nexium synthroid for sale plavix discount buy doxycycline cheap lowest price alprazolam cheap lorazepam online nexium cheap cheap generic cialis discount propecia pharmacy prozac soma discount soma online buy generic flagyl discount nexium cheapest tramadol prices discount viagra levitra generic buy accutane cheap synthroid pharmacy where to buy phentermine acomplia pills viagra sale bactrim pharmacy buy accutane without prescription lowest price acomplia buy lorazepam cheap buy phentermine without prescription diazepam for sale cheapest clomid valium prices buy prozac online tramadol sale clomid online synthroid cheap cheap alprazolam online order soma online buy zithromax phentermine no prescription where to buy lorazepam accutane online where to buy bactrim propecia cheap cheapest valium prices pharmacy lorazepam bactrim for sale price of soma buy cialis order bactrim online lorazepam without prescription zoloft without prescription lowest price diazepam pharmacy clomid cheap propecia buy levitra cheap purchase soma online purchase prozac order zithromax valium no prescription valium prozac prices nexium generic zoloft cheap cheap generic prozac order doxycycline online diazepam pills levitra accutane no prescription buy lorazepam tramadol prices online doxycycline where to buy synthroid buy alprazolam online alprazolam prescription zoloft buy cheap flagyl online zithromax pills online valium acomplia cheap plavix pills cheap zithromax online levitra online stores lorazepam pills order flagyl online doxycycline prescription cheap lorazepam buy acomplia discount acomplia cheapest prozac prices alprazolam without a prescription online synthroid cheap phentermine tablets alprazolam order clomid online cheapest diazepam prices zoloft for sale viagra pharmacy buy cheap lorazepam online clomid online cheap pharmacy tramadol buy cheap soma purchase clomid online cheap doxycycline purchase prozac online purchase cialis flagyl prescription diazepam prices viagra online stores accutane prozac pharmacy bactrim generic buy zoloft without prescription lowest price flagyl clomid pills buy clomid online cialis pharmacy pharmacy phentermine price of clomid buy acomplia online price of prozac phentermine online tramadol buy lasix online levitra without prescription buy cheap xanax online cheapest propecia prices cheapest acomplia prices buy lorazepam online cheap generic xanax accutane without a prescription synthroid without prescription order plavix flagyl without a prescription buy generic clomid lowest price lorazepam order soma order zoloft online propecia sale synthroid discount pharmacy cialis price of lasix prozac pills tramadol without prescription valium pharmacy purchase zoloft online buy cheap lorazepam accutane for sale lowest price clomid levitra no prescription synthroid sale nexium prices lowest price nexium generic lorazepam purchase synthroid xanax online cheap purchase bactrim cheapest alprazolam synthroid generic cheap xanax cheap generic acomplia buy cheap lasix online accutane pharmacy alprazolam pills cheap valium online lowest price cialis plavix generic buy levitra online tramadol online stores buy cheap nexium online zithromax lorazepam online stores acomplia no prescription lorazepam cheap bactrim no prescription buy plavix online lasix generic purchase clomid buy cheap zoloft online buy generic xanax doxycycline online cheap lorazepam online cheap cialis online cheap zithromax for sale generic lasix cheapest synthroid generic nexium purchase phentermine online prozac generic order prozac online clomid prices where to buy tramadol price of phentermine phentermine prescription lowest price propecia cialis online stores discount plavix cheap diazepam soma generic cheapest viagra prices cheapest bactrim prices buy cheap flagyl lorazepam pharmacy buy diazepam online propecia discount buy valium buy zithromax without prescription buy generic tramadol order levitra valium discount nexium online discount doxycycline bactrim cheap propecia prices plavix prices online nexium clomid generic synthroid buy cheap prozac online lasix online stores buy cheap valium online cheap xanax tablets xanax without a prescription buy soma online cheap phentermine online where to buy prozac where to buy alprazolam buy cheap plavix online order phentermine generic clomid buy tramadol cheap prozac cheap propecia tablets generic xanax purchase zithromax levitra online purchase viagra propecia generic generic synthroid buy cheap alprazolam online where to buy propecia acomplia without prescription cheapest diazepam order lorazepam xanax discount where to buy zithromax cheap diazepam tablets price of cialis cheap generic lasix order flagyl buy clomid without prescription diazepam online cheap order accutane zithromax without prescription doxycycline cheap lasix online cheap cheapest plavix alprazolam online buy cheap clomid online buy generic zithromax levitra for sale buy cheap acomplia doxycycline online stores purchase flagyl online nexium generic plavix pharmacy nexium price of alprazolam purchase nexium online buy generic cialis cheap flagyl tablets buy cheap bactrim online buy alprazolam cheap soma sale buy generic synthroid phentermine sale plavix pharmacy buy viagra online xanax purchase cialis online pharmacy flagyl alprazolam no prescription cheapest bactrim buy cialis online clomid sale flagyl online stores tramadol pills propecia online cheap lowest price tramadol cheap valium tablets price of viagra clomid no prescription synthroid pills order doxycycline nexium sale order cialis price of zithromax buy nexium cheap alprazolam for sale discount valium buy generic acomplia generic tramadol plavix without a prescription online clomid cheapest lorazepam prices lasix without a prescription order levitra online cheap cialis online online soma cialis no prescription buy propecia zoloft discount lowest price lasix cheap prozac phentermine generic cheapest levitra levitra pharmacy clomid pharmacy bactrim prices acomplia online cheap where to buy diazepam cheap generic levitra accutane sale tramadol discount cheapest doxycycline purchase acomplia online accutane online cheap cheap generic tramadol price of bactrim order lorazepam online order xanax online purchase levitra flagyl online valium for sale cialis plavix sale cheap levitra tablets price of zoloft purchase viagra online cheap generic zoloft flagyl discount prozac prescription soma pharmacy propecia order propecia online price of flagyl online levitra price of doxycycline bactrim propecia without a prescription acomplia prescription order synthroid zoloft online cheap flagyl sale buy synthroid cheap buy lasix without prescription zoloft without a prescription alprazolam sale buy tramadol without prescription prozac without a prescription flagyl generic buy propecia online cialis prices purchase lasix cheapest nexium purchase diazepam buy lorazepam without prescription buy cialis cheap lorazepam no prescription where to buy accutane xanax online zithromax discount prozac discount synthroid prescription lowest price bactrim discount zithromax accutane generic buy generic bactrim order valium online buy generic lorazepam cheap generic flagyl where to buy zoloft purchase accutane online discount phentermine plavix cheap zithromax cheap cheap generic lorazepam viagra cheap xanax online purchase bactrim online generic valium propecia online stores flagyl pharmacy lowest price valium buy synthroid without prescription cheap viagra online buy cheap lasix cheap doxycycline tablets levitra cheap online alprazolam diazepam pharmacy cheapest nexium prices purchase acomplia xanax pharmacy propecia pharmacy cheap accutane online valium without prescription cheap alprazolam purchase propecia purchase diazepam online cheapest phentermine prices generic zoloft order tramadol clomid online stores plavix no prescription price of synthroid cheap generic propecia cheapest tramadol order alprazolam online buy alprazolam without prescription buy cheap cialis discount levitra where to buy valium cheap prozac online cheap generic soma lorazepam generic buy flagyl cheap price of propecia lowest price soma order acomplia online lowest price viagra buy doxycycline without prescription cheap zithromax tablets flagyl no prescription diazepam without a prescription cheap levitra online prozac online cheap levitra without a prescription buy generic doxycycline buy prozac cheap phentermine for sale buy bactrim cheap pharmacy zithromax cheapest flagyl where to buy flagyl acomplia online stores buy lasix cheap buy cheap propecia online cheap soma cheapest accutane prices pharmacy alprazolam lasix pharmacy cheap zithromax viagra prescription zithromax without a prescription online accutane cheap lasix online acomplia generic cheap flagyl cheap clomid tablets order lasix online cheapest alprazolam prices buy nexium buy cheap clomid synthroid without a prescription accutane pills buy clomid diazepam sale bactrim sale lorazepam cheap doxycycline online valium pills buy soma cheap buy lasix phentermine online stores buy synthroid online online lorazepam lasix no prescription buy generic propecia xanax for sale cheapest zoloft prices buy phentermine cheap plavix online cheap bactrim cheap viagra tablets viagra without prescription cheap generic diazepam buy zoloft cheap order accutane online cheapest soma prices clomid cheap viagra prices phentermine cheap nexium pharmacy discount synthroid lorazepam prices buy xanax flagyl cheap cheap generic doxycycline buy cheap levitra prozac no prescription buy zithromax cheap discount lasix discount tramadol prozac without prescription discount cialis cheap lasix soma prices online phentermine buy propecia without prescription cheap diazepam online online diazepam plavix online cheap order bactrim where to buy soma cheapest xanax prices buy cheap xanax xanax prices cheap clomid online prozac online lowest price zithromax online bactrim cheapest cialis valium online stores synthroid online stores zoloft prices generic acomplia xanax cheap diazepam discount viagra online purchase tramadol online valium without a prescription order zithromax online doxycycline no prescription tramadol clomid for sale pharmacy soma viagra discount synthroid online cheap purchase propecia online viagra online cheap cheap valium cialis without a prescription discount prozac lasix online levitra online cheap cheap soma online buy levitra without prescription buy flagyl online buy cheap zithromax online acomplia discount where to buy plavix cheapest soma soma online cheap nexium without a prescription purchase alprazolam zoloft online tramadol no prescription cheap phentermine online cialis zoloft online stores phentermine online lasix pills valium sale cheap bactrim online clomid prescription generic viagra levitra pills purchase xanax online buy bactrim pharmacy plavix buy cheap diazepam accutane prescription buy cheap diazepam online buy nexium online cheap lorazepam tablets cheap alprazolam tablets price of valium buy cheap synthroid online discount bactrim lasix without prescription generic alprazolam flagyl without prescription online xanax viagra no prescription generic zithromax levitra prices generic cialis buy cheap phentermine online buy clomid cheap buy xanax cheap cialis online buy generic viagra doxycycline discount order clomid online propecia cheap plavix online purchase valium online cheap zoloft generic propecia lorazepam discount buy cheap soma online buy cheap prozac phentermine prices xanax pills online prozac prozac online stores acomplia pharmacy acomplia prices buy viagra lowest price doxycycline cheap acomplia online cheapest levitra prices buy cheap doxycycline buy cheap tramadol online propecia prescription zithromax generic buy tramadol price of plavix lowest price phentermine prozac sale buy alprazolam cheap generic clomid cheapest accutane discount soma purchase synthroid online buy generic plavix doxycycline generic purchase plavix xanax prescription valium generic bactrim online cheap purchase lorazepam online buy xanax online alprazolam online stores price of acomplia zoloft prescription soma pills generic levitra cheap synthroid discount zoloft alprazolam pharmacy viagra cheap cheap accutane cheap generic bactrim buy phentermine online buy flagyl buy levitra cheapest acomplia buy generic phentermine price of tramadol buy cheap zithromax cheap lasix tablets buy plavix cheap nexium discount tramadol pharmacy purchase accutane phentermine online cheap buy cheap acomplia online cialis cheap lasix for sale cheap flagyl online nexium no prescription cheapest lasix prices pharmacy xanax buy tramadol online alprazolam without prescription buy zithromax online order nexium viagra generic buy generic valium where to buy acomplia acomplia without a prescription buy cheap viagra pharmacy levitra order phentermine online buy flagyl without prescription buy accutane buy cheap alprazolam purchase zithromax online lowest price prozac lowest price accutane doxycycline sale bactrim without a prescription alprazolam online cheap cheap generic zithromax pharmacy bactrim levitra discount cheapest plavix prices buy cheap synthroid purchase doxycycline online buy cialis without prescription generic bactrim buy zoloft online synthroid prices propecia online cheap acomplia tablets buy cheap zoloft doxycycline pharmacy cheapest prozac cheap viagra cheap nexium online price of diazepam cheap generic plavix cialis prescription xanax online stores soma prescription plavix without prescription soma for sale lowest price zoloft cheapest zithromax prices cheapest zithromax buy generic alprazolam lorazepam for sale alprazolam generic cialis for sale cheap tramadol online cheapest cialis prices synthroid online order tramadol online buy viagra without prescription order viagra online zithromax no prescription order plavix online flagyl pills cheap cialis tablets cheap clomid diazepam generic buy generic nexium purchase alprazolam online flagyl propecia pills viagra without a prescription propecia for sale cheap cialis flagyl for sale prozac cheap diazepam without prescription zoloft sale order viagra accutane discount doxycycline for sale valium prescription lorazepam online bactrim discount cheapest valium order zoloft alprazolam cheap zoloft generic buy prozac without prescription purchase phentermine online lasix online flagyl cheapest propecia lorazepam sale order synthroid online valium online cheap purchase doxycycline cialis discount lowest price plavix purchase xanax zithromax prices pharmacy propecia buy prozac doxycycline cheap generic synthroid purchase tramadol pharmacy viagra cheapest xanax soma cheap generic accutane soma no prescription order lasix price of nexium buy valium without prescription buy cheap accutane xanax generic doxycycline without a prescription buy cheap levitra online synthroid no prescription cheapest phentermine valium online buy generic levitra cheapest doxycycline prices prozac for sale plavix online stores purchase levitra online lorazepam without a prescription zithromax online stores lasix prescription buy cheap cialis online buy valium online pharmacy zoloft pharmacy doxycycline price of accutane cheapest clomid prices clomid without a prescription valium cheap acomplia sale bactrim without prescription zoloft pharmacy levitra prescription tramadol cheap buy viagra cheap cheapest zoloft buy soma cheap propecia online flagyl online cheap cheap generic alprazolam cheapest lorazepam buy diazepam purchase soma soma without a prescription buy generic diazepam buy cheap viagra online cheap levitra cheap generic valium purchase zoloft order prozac plavix zoloft no prescription discount xanax pharmacy valium clomid discount cheap accutane tablets accutane without prescription soma without prescription soma cheap propecia no prescription propecia without prescription zithromax prescription pharmacy accutane cheapest viagra buy bactrim online diazepam cheap order acomplia buy generic zoloft order valium cheap soma tablets xanax sale buy generic soma viagra for sale cheap zoloft tablets lorazepam prescription diazepam prescription price of xanax nexium without prescription order diazepam online discount flagyl where to buy lasix pharmacy synthroid cheap nexium tablets buy cheap valium generic prozac buy xanax without prescription zithromax sale cheapest lasix bactrim pills lasix where to buy xanax diazepam online order xanax doxycycline pills purchase nexium phentermine pharmacy cialis pills buy doxycycline online buy soma without prescription lowest price levitra clomid alprazolam discount buy phentermine buy generic lasix buy acomplia without prescription cheap bactrim tablets discount lorazepam zithromax online cheap buy diazepam cheap generic soma order propecia generic diazepam order nexium online tramadol online cheap purchase plavix online lasix discount online viagra alprazolam prices phentermine discount where to buy levitra acomplia for sale soma online stores buy cheap bactrim bactrim online price of levitra generic accutane buy cheap accutane online order cialis online nexium for sale where to buy nexium price of lorazepam buy propecia cheap doxycycline online levitra sale cheap nexium cheapest flagyl prices cialis without prescription buy nexium without prescription discount accutane where to buy viagra zoloft pills where to buy doxycycline tramadol for sale buy zoloft tramadol generic cialis sale where to buy clomid online zoloft cheap synthroid online buy accutane online nexium prescription purchase flagyl flagyl prices buy generic prozac discount alprazolam diazepam no prescription buy cheap plavix viagra pills phentermine without a prescription buy valium cheap generic flagyl cialis generic online zithromax cheap generic nexium doxycycline without prescription lasix cheap online plavix buy plavix without prescription generic doxycycline plavix prescription buy acomplia cheap diazepam xanax no prescription discount clomid purchase valium online acomplia lowest price xanax tramadol prescription pharmacy acomplia lowest price synthroid order alprazolam

American society seems to have accepted that one can be “voted off the island.” But, should that be allowed in relation to government employment that is protected by due process rights?

The purpose of hedging governmental employment with due process rights is to prevent jobs from being used as patronage every time the political winds shift. On a university campus, such rights are often needed to protect free speech.

Indeed, in my law practice, I have been engaged to coach professors through various types of employment disputes without resorting to litigation. I have to admit that a warring faculty is a pretty cutthroat group to be among. It would probably take a sociologist rather than a trial lawyer to explain it, but I have seen it often enough to be impressed by it.

Along came the North Carolina Court of Appeals in Leonard Bernold v Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina, which affirmed the lower court and Board of Governors decision to terminate a professor on the grounds of “lack of collegiality.”

I cannot imagine a more subjective basis for termination, short of taking a vote among a faculty to determine if a professor was “liked” or “disliked.” For this reason, I cannot imagine that such a basis for termination actually comports with the protections one thought would have been enshrined in due process rights. It should be noted that the lack of collegiality charge was dressed up with the allegation that it was disruptive to the faculty and had gone on for three out of five prior employment years. But, “disruptive” is hardly less subjective. That it had gone on for awhile does not seem to alter the subjective nature of the charge.

There had been a full hearing and assuming there was a transcript, so it seems logical to conclude the court opinion simply left out the “juicy” tidbits that might make the subjective into the objective, or at least more substantive. But, more likely, this is the direction we are headed with due process rights. We are, in fact, abolishing them by demoting them to the level of mere feelings.

[Hat tip to Professor Ross Runkel.]

Financial Advisor or Manager?

In Colorado, at least, it might matter. In Dish Network v Altomari (Colo. Ct. App. June 25, 2009), the question was whether the employee that supervised some people, probably a sales staff, was in “management.” If the employee was in management, then under the Colorado non-compete statute, a non-compete against the employee was enforceable. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and held the employee was in management.

The term “management” is not defined in the Colorado statute. However, it is pretty clear the court is confused about what constitutes “management.” The only employees in “management” are those who can bind the company or otherwise decide company policy, typically corporate officers and directors. That would be a logical purpose of the statute. Applying the statute to middle or lower tier supervisors turns the statute from a fair allocation of business risk to a draconian labor control tool.

Of course, will Financial Advisors in Colorado with titles like “Vice President” or “Director” once again face non-compete risks when they trade jobs? Protocol firms may not be tempted but many will be in the is shaky economy. Financial Advisors in Colorado should try to wheedle an email or something that indicates they are not in management, or obtain a page from a firm policy manual that says something similar.

(Hat Tip: Professor Ross Runkel’s employment law summaries)

Email Insecurity

The case reported by Professor Ross Runkel issued by a New Jersey appellate court, Stengart v Loving Care Agency, held that privileged communication by the former employee with her attorney through her employer’s computer retained its privilege.

The case was interesting because the employee made the same mistake many people make. The employee was using a web based password protected email account believing that no trace of the email on the outside website was being left on the computer owned by the employer. That was untrue. Because the employee was viewing web email through the browser on the employer’s computer, the computer captured a picture of every image the employee saw, thus preserving it for the employer’s computer analyst to retrieve.

The moral of the story: do not use an employer’s computer for anything you want to remain private. Go outside of the employer’s hardware.

Most employers are not set up to retrieve or view web images viewed by the employee, but that does not mean a computer expert cannot retrieve the images from the computer when desired. Just because compliance systems are not set up to see every image the employee can see, like web based email, does not mean the email, once viewed on the employer’s computer, cannot be viewed by a computer analyst.

Forfeitures – Will the Commercial Bank Broker Dealers Resort to Employee Fines?

The investment banks, the wirehouses, and the large broker-dealers, which have all but ceased to exist, had a love - hate relationship with “at will” employment law. Even the late and great Merrill Lynch, once the “white hats” in the industry, struggled with it from time to time. In the 2000s, however, Merrill Lynch seemed to lead the industry toward a reasonable set of protocols by which stock brokers, registered representatives could change jobs. Merrill Lynch, at the end of its corporate life, would not engage in retaliatory litigation and disdained forfeitures of earned stock or compensation.

It remains to be seen how industry survivors will fashion their employment policies going forward. However, California courts have recently indicated a no nonsense attitude toward employment contracts containing non-compete clauses and California has always treated forfeitures with disdain. Texas, likewise, seems to have affirmed its own legal, if not moral, prohibition of anti-competitive provisions that go further than necessary to protect legitimate employer interests, such as forfeitures of earned stock or compensation.

The Texas Court of Appeals in Corpus Christi issued its 2009 opinion in Valley Diagnostic Clinic v Dougherty. While this was a dispute between a doctor and his former clinic, in which the clinic sought to forfeit earned but deferred compensation, the principles are the same for other industries. Just as the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners places certain limits on enforcement of these types of clauses, so, too, does FINRA and state regulators (even if they are not identical). Over shadowing that, however, is that the public policy of Texas, like many other states, deems “a compensation provision made only in exchange for a non-compete promise…precisely the sort of restraint of trade that Texas law prohibits.”

Dogs Win Over Free Speech

In Oklahoma, on a slow news day, you can be sure each local television news broadcaster will have a story about a dog complete with video footage. Movie industry executives also seem to have concluded that movies about dogs sell tickets.

But, it now appears that human civil rights can be curtailed in the face of dog rights. The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed the federal district court sitting in Oklahoma City, in a published opinion no less, in a case styled Rajeanna Dixon v Oklahoma Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners. It took thirty pages for the Tenth Circuit to explain this. Indeed, the challenge we are now faced with is to explain why it took thirty pages for the Tenth Circuit to reduce the civil rights of a state employee to zero, elevate dog rights to greater than constitutional importance, and zero out the First Amendment in the absence of a national security consideration. Oh, and the Central Intelligence Agency is involved, so keep reading.

Ms. Dixon was fired from her secretarial job at the Veterinary Board because she allegedly discussed an ongoing investigation into dog fighting and dog doping with her own veterinarian, who happened to be a veterinary association member responsible for legislative over sight of the Veterinary Board and its budgets and powers, largely because she was concerned the agency, which only had four employees, including her, was stepping out side of its mandate. Also, she allegedly told the veterinarian that the board’s investigator was now carrying a gun even when he went to meet with veterinarians.

The federal district court denied the summary judgment motions asserting qualified immunity presented by the board and the board appealed. Thus, this opinion by the Tenth Circuit was doubly weird because normally the mere denial of a summary judgment motion is interlocutory and not appealable.

It has to be noted that the investigation of the Veterinary Board into dog fighting and dog doping resulted in an arrest, probably by another law enforcement agency, that was reported in the news media. It has to be noted that Ms. Dixon comments on the investigation, if they occurred, were made after the news media report made the investigation, at least in part, public. Indeed, the news media report suggests it had become a matter of public concern, at least on a slow news day, and thus Ms. Dixon’s comment upon on it should have been presumptively protected, and not used as a pretext for firing her.

But, the Tenth Circuit concluded that there were “unprotected” statements, in addition to protected ones. In other words, as soon as the Tenth Circuit found that the First Amendment did not reach these statements, then Ms. Dixon could be fired for speaking about the Veterinary Board if the interests of the Veterinary Board, as a government employer, outweighed Ms. Dixon’s right to free speech. The Tenth Circuit concluded that Ms. Dixon’s other comments were “trivial in nature.” (“Serious complaints about discrimination can certainly be a matter of public concern, but the record reveals discussion of nothing more than a few stray comments.”) The right of the state government agency not to have a secretary discuss agency business, public or non-public, was deemed greater than the First Amendment protection.

Comically, the Tenth Circuit put the Veterinary Board of Oklahoma on a high investigatory pedestal when it parenthetically stated: “That is why the CIA regularly responds to inquiries by saying it can “neither confirm nor deny.” Admittedly, sitting in Denver, the Tenth Circuit might not be completely aware that the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States and the Oklahoma Veterinary Board are not handling matters of equal importance. That might explain the lack of a sense of perspective in the opinion and may be the loss of perspective in government generally. Apparently, we dare not have transparency in any government agency, even one that abandoned its mission to regulate veterinarians in favor of investigating dog fighting rings. Apparently, our society will come crashing down around us if we have First Amendment rights about state agency veterinarian medicine regulation.

What They Would Have Done – An Evidentiary Quagmire

Imagine that you had a right to exercise certain stock options that you had earned. Imagine that the contract under which you were going to exercise the stock options gave you a three month window in which to do it, but that no one sent you a copy of the contract or the amendment that contained the three month limitation. Assume that the stock issuing company admitted that you never got the amendment and could not have known about the three month exercise window. Imagine that after you tried to exercise, you were told you were outside the three month window and your options had been cancelled. Breach of contract, right? All the elements are there: contract, breach of contract, and now you just have to prove damages.

Well, imagine the stock issuer puts on an expert that testified that no sensible investor would have exercised those options because at best, at the time, they were a break even proposition. Therefore, you have no damages. The expert was not allowed to give an opinion that you would not have exercised the options.

Surely that testimony was irrelevant, right? Just as your damages in most state would be limited to delivery date pricing, i.e., the price of the stock on the date you should have exercised but could not because of the breach of contract brought about by failing to give you a copy of the contract amendment, the other side should not be allowed to speculate about whether you would have exercised or allowed the options to expire, right?

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, in First Marblehead Corporation v House, held the expert’s testimony was admissible and would support a verdict that the employee had no damages because the expert testified a reasonable investor would not have been likely to have exercised the stock options because at best it was a break even proposition.

The testimony was not that the employee could not financially afford to exercise. The testimony was not that the employee would have lost so much money exercising that the exercise would have been uneconomic. The testimony was just that it would have not been attractive enough for the reasonable investor. That seems speculative. Worse, it allowed a party to breach a contract with impunity.

Of course, as it turned out, it would have been a good investment because several years later when the company went public the stock value would have been multiples of the cost of exercising.

The Next Wave – What Will It Be?

As an Oklahoma based trial lawyer, I do not have the luxury of a continuous stream of cases all in the same genre or even area of law. Largely originating on one of the three coasts (including the Gulf Coast), cases usually come in waves. I just completed a three year group of 41 cases, ten of which were tried, against Goldman Sachs & Company. This particular wave of cases was actually the second tidal surge because during the three years prior to the just concluded three years, I was counsel against Goldman Sachs in a predecessor wave of cases.

Goldman Sachs manages its exposure somewhat idiosyncratically and not quite like the other wire houses or other member firms in the securities industry. For instance, Goldman Sachs is far more concerned about its image than it is winning or losing, or even the economics of any particular case. Because the securities industry effectively gags its associated persons thus creating a conspiracy of silence, Goldman Sachs can litigate endlessly with associated persons and face little risk that the image it jealously guards will be tarnished by inconvenient media exposure.

The news media has no effective means of penetrating this conspiracy of silence, because no member firm is going to allow its associated persons to speak freely to the media, even about other member firms (or previous employers). Also, one has to wonder if the media will even try to break the code of silence, because of the possible back lash by one or more member firms.

Abusive personnel practices have been a hall mark of about half the securities industry, and avoided by the other half. Goldman Sachs’ abuse of registered representatives was largely the result of institutional errors made when investment bankers attempted to “fix” the firm’s “brokerage” and “advisory” personal wealth management business. It reminded me of watching a newly minted teenage driver. You constantly have to remind them at first to look back over their shoulder while backing out of the driveway. Goldman Sachs was so intent upon socially engineering the lives of its registered representatives that it back over half of them.

Can Scrooge Dock Your Wages?

During the National Public Radio program Morning Edition, Liz Ryan, a columnist for Business Week, was interviewed by Steve Inskeep, and you can find the interview here. According to the NPR story, a company called Clarian Health first said it would dock the wages of employees who are overweight or who smoke. Then it backed away from that plan. When asked if such a wage withholding plan was lawful, Liz Ryan said it was.

She is wrong.

In most states, it would be illegal by statute to withhold wages without written consent. Thus, when or if someone objected to Clarian Health’s announced plan, Clarian Health no doubt got a refresher course on these little used statutes.

For in-house corporate lawyers who often must be “jacks of all trades,” Gordon E. Jackson’s book, Labor and Employment Law Handbook, Aspen Publishers, is a good desk reference to keep around to avoid such errors. Liz Ryan is a well-regarded human resourcees expert who writes a blog on workplace matters — and is a professional opera singer, as well! However, she is not an attorney. If Ms. Ryan is going to grant news interviews on employment law, she might want to grab a copy of Jackson’s handbook, too.

FINRA Enforcement Actions: Would you Rather Fight than Switch?

Karen Donovan at Registered Rep reported the recent study issued by a Washington, DC law firm that concluded that fines and sanctions were less when the enforcement issues were litigated than when imposed by settling with FINRA (“Financial Industry Regulatory Authority”). FINRA, according to Donovan, rebutted the study by merely sloughing it off as a lawyer’s marketing dream.

I have not done a study. Indeed, the study that was issued by the law firm reported by Registered Representative only looked at 55 panel decisions from June 2006 through June 2007. That means the sweep of time was not considered and it means the recent merger of NASD enforcement with NYSE enforcement was not evaluated. In my own experience, there was a difference between the two.

FINRA investigations were usually conducted initially by a compliance professional that was not a trial lawyer and NYSE investigations were often conducted by lawyers, some of whom had enforcement trial experience. Both were relatively easy and fair to deal with prior to filing of a formal enforcement proceeding, and lots of matters could be settled at that stage. Once, however, the formal enforcement action was filed and pending, both were much more difficult.

My own experience has led me to believe the following about enforcement actions generally, and I believe this will generally be true of FINRA enforcement actions.

1. Enforcement proceeding panels usually have at least two industry members on the panel with an enforcement department attorney acting somewhat as an administrative law judge. Industry members are more likely to buffer the harshness of sanctions even in the presence of a stifling enforcement department panelist.

2. The real problem in enforcement actions for the licensed professional is financing the defense if the supervisor or employer will not do so. FINRA has finite resources to allocate, too, but in any given case the licensed professional is out classed. That does not mean that FINRA won’t be tempted to pick off the weak, the sick and aged like any good buffalo hunter, and avoid the bulls and mastodons running with the herd.

3. Most licensed professionals that end up in enforcement proceedings are probably there because of a lapse in integrity, but too many are there for an error in judgment that may not have been their fault. While the industry is retreating from its hand shake business model, that is still the dominate platform. It is a fertile ground for hindsight compliance reviews, customer complaints and disinterring the financial advice from the then prevalent circumstances.

4. Some enforcement actions are brought because of a lack of perspective. A lapse in judgment, i.e., a moment of carelessness, should not result in the same sanctions as intentional or even criminal conduct. If there was no loss attributable to the violative conduct, it almost always means the conduct resulted from unintentional rather than intentional conduct.

These are some, but not all, of the considerations that would create an environment in which enforcement proceedings might result in lesser sanctions or settlements result in harsher sanctions. Clearly, some have nothing to do with the facts of the case. None of them have to do with whether they are studied by lawyers or sociologists.

An Anatomy of U-5 Defamation

The newest published decision regarding U-5 defamation of a terminated registered representative is like an aquarium, for once you can see all of the fish swimming about.

Deborah Galarneau v Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc. was issued by United States Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. The case did not go to industry arbitration because it included a federal discrimination claim. But, the only claim that survived motion practice was the claim that the Form U-5 filed by the employer was defamatory.

The case was tried and decided under the law of the state of Maine, which extended to the employer a qualified privilege, which required the employee to prove that the U-5 entry was false and that the entry was made with actual malice. On appeal, the employer sought 1st Amendment protection for its U-5 filing, but that rather bizarre argument was too little too late.

The 1st Circuit found that the record in the trial court before the jury, indeed, did contain evidence supporting the jury verdict. The employer on four occasions conducted management review of the trading, approved it each time, issued comfort letters to the customer and denied in written responses to regulators that the trading was in anyway improper.

Meanwhile, Ms. Galarneau was summoned to New York by her employer to be interviewed by the Office of the General Counsel. The lesson here for registered representatives: prepare for such an interview. Engage counsel to assist in the preparation, if necessary. Do not take counsel to the interview by the employer (employees that feel they need to take a lawyer to a meeting with their employer should prepare their resume). At the meeting, she allegedly admitted exercising time and price discretion.

But, on her U-5, in addition to listing exercise of time and price discretion as a reason for termination, the employer listed “inappropriate trading,” the same trading approved four times by management, as a reason for termination. The predictable result was that no other firm would consider her.

One of the interesting things contrasted in the opinion was the over reaction by in house counsel. In house counsel rebutted the state regulatory inquiry and then permitted the regulatory response to be contradicted in the U-5. In an awkward effort to defend it, the employer on appeal tried to argue that only after the employer received a report from its outside accounting vendor, Bates Capital, did it become clear that some of the trading was “inappropriate.” Because the employer is the largest broker dealer in the world, it is laughable to think its supervisory accounting systems cannot detect “inappropriate” trading, especially since that trading has to be approved one trade at a time by a local supervisor and further stretches credulity beyond the breaking point to think a multi-billion broker dealer and investment bank must rely on a tiny non-public accounting vendor to learn the truth.

***********************************
After the foregoing was posted, Investment News published its news blurb on the opinion which you can find here. While I have great respect for this publication, the title of the article implies the entire judgment was reversed. The article seems to spin the opinion (calling it a “report,” possibly indicating a lack of familiarity with the judicial system) favorably to the employer. However, the $850,000 verdict was sustained. The $2.1 million punitive damages award was reversed. The plaintiff was able to prove actual malice or the verdict for compensatory damages would not have been sustained. The plaintiff was unable to prove the U-5 defamation was intentionally designed to make the plaintiff unemployable, so the punitive damages award was not sustained.

Next Page »