Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Norris v. SEC 11-3129

Norris v. SEC 11-3129

Ratings: (0)|Views: 8,108|Likes:
Published by FedSmith, Inc.

More info:

Published by: FedSmith, Inc. on Jun 10, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/10/2012

pdf

text

original

 
United States Court of Appealsfor the Federal Circuit
 __________________________ JEFFREY B. NORRIS,
 Petitioner,
v.SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
Respondent.
 __________________________ 
2011-3129
 __________________________ 
Petition for review of an arbitrator’s decision in caseno. SEC-AR-09-005 by Daniel M. Winograd.
 ___________________________ 
Decided: April 10, 2012
 ___________________________ 
M
ICHAEL
J.
 
 ATOR
, Kator, Parks & Weiser, P.L.L.C.,of Washington, DC, argued for petitioner. With him onthe brief was A 
DAM
J.
 
C
 ASNER
, of Austin, Texas.T
 ARA 
K.
 
H
OGAN
, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litiga-tion Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent. Withher on the brief were T
ONY 
W
EST
, Assistant AttorneyGeneral, J
EANNE
E.
 
D
 AVIDSON
, Director, and T
ODD
M.
 
H
UGHES
, Deputy Director. Of counsel on the brief wasJ
UANITA 
C.
 
H
ERNANDEZ
, Senior Counsel, Securities &Exchange Commission, of Washington, DC.
 
NORRIS
v.
SEC
 2
 __________________________ 
Before D
 YK 
, M
OORE
, and O’M
 ALLEY 
,
Circuit Judges
.D
 YK 
,
Circuit Judge
.Jeffrey B. Norris (“Norris”) petitions for review of anarbitrator’s decision affirming his removal from his posi-tion as a Trial Attorney with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (“SEC”).
U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n v. Nat’lTreasury Emps. Union Chapter 293 
, No. SEC-AR-09-005(Apr. 19, 2011) (Winograd, Arb.) (“
 Arbitration Decision
”).Because we hold that the arbitrator erroneously failed toconsider new evidence bearing upon the reasonableness of Norris’s removal, we vacate and remand.B
 ACKGROUND
 Norris served as a Trial Attorney with the SEC fromFebruary 23, 1992, until he was removed on August 28,2009. Before the events leading to his removal, disciplinewas initiated against Norris for exercising poor judgmentand misuse of government email on two separate occa-sions. In 2007, Norris was suspended from service with-out pay for one day for exercising poor judgment inemailing an attorney who represented a witness in anongoing SEC case, and expressing his opinion about themerits of the case. Thereafter, from March to May 2007,Norris exchanged a series of antagonistic emails from hisSEC email account, and in which he identified himself asSEC trial counsel, with businessman Mark Cuban, ownerof the Dallas Mavericks professional basketball team.Based on this exchange, Norris was suspended withoutpay for fourteen calendar days due to his misuse of gov-ernment email.The removal here was based on three additionalemails sent in 2008. On September 11, 2008, Norris sent
 
NORRIS
v.
SEC
 3
an email to the Washington Post from his SEC emailaccount in which he identified himself as Senior TrialCounsel and expressed certain political views. On Octo-ber 19, 2008, Norris sent an email to two supervisors andthree members of the support staff in which he demeanedthe support staff and implied that they were incompetentat performing their job duties. Finally, on October 23,2008, Norris emailed a confidential suspicious activityreport (“SAR”) to an appointed receiver and his counsel inviolation of SEC policies.
1
 On May 22, 2009, the SEC sent Norris a notice of pro-posed removal which proposed to remove him based onthe three emails sent in 2008, and recounted the prioremails which had led to the previous disciplinary actionsagainst him. Norris responded, urging that his actions inconnection with the 2008 emails were influenced byseveral personal circumstances, including his wife’sbecoming fully disabled, his daughter’s suffering from Asperger’s Disorder, and Norris’s adult Attention DeficitHyperactivity Disorder (“AD/HD”). On August 19, 2009,the deciding official, Rose Romero (“Romero”), informedNorris that she had decided to remove him effective August 28, 2009, for misuse of government equipment bysending unauthorized or inappropriate emails. In thedecision, Romero stated that “because of [Norris’s] contin-ued inappropriate and/or unauthorized emails [she had]lost confidence that [he could] effectively perform [his]assigned duties.” J.A. 118. Romero also noted that she
1
A SAR is a report filed by a financial institutionwith a federal law enforcement agency in which theinstitution discloses known or suspected violations of federal law or suspicious monetary transactions. Becausea SAR may result in a criminal investigation, SARs andany information that would reveal the existence of a SARare required to be kept strictly confidential.
See
12 C.F.R.§ 21.11.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->