Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
No. 95-2106
Petitioners,
v.
Respondents.
____________________
____________________
Before
____________________
Errata Sheet
Errata Sheet
No. 95-2106
Petitioners,
v.
Respondents.
____________________
____________________
Before
____________________
____________________
I.
I.
__
Background
Background
__________
account executive.
Over the
-33
Commission's regulations.
Davis also
12.100-.106,
and paid the required $25 filing fee, 49 Fed. Reg. 6692 (Feb.
22, 1984).1
12.26(a).
Both parties
17 C.F.R.
Id.
___
12.100(b), 12.105-.106.
proceeding.
Id.
___
12.300-.315.
____________________
1.
were
in controversy,
59 Fed. Reg.
of filing fees
9637 (Mar.
1,
1994), we cite
to the
regulations in effect
in 1993,
when
-44
the claim had to exceed $10,000 and only one of the parties
By
Id. at 6629.
___
Finding these
First, the ALJ held that Davis failed to establish CII's and
Specifically,
the ALJ found that Davis had undermined the merits of all but
complaint.
In
As for
-55
bad faith, the ALJ held that Davis's bad faith in pursuing
following facts:
hearing.
conduct, the ALJ ordered Davis to pay CII and Carr $19,417.75
litigation.
After
In
-66
the ALJ.
Davis's bad faith but concluding that the ALJ's fee award was
Although it sustained
Noting
-77
that CII and Carr, not Davis, had elected the formal
decisional proceeding.
The Commission
-88
II.
II.
___
Analysis
Analysis
________
The
Some
standard of review.
R.J. O'Brien & Assocs., Inc., 819 F.2d 1435, 1440-41 (8th
____________________________
Cir. 1987); cf. Northeast Utils. Serv. Co. v. FERC, 993 F.2d
___ __________________________
____
-99
`reasoned decisionmaking'").
See In re
___ _____
(CCH)
-1010
(same).
costs.
discretion.
support.
12.12, 12.13, as
There is no
To
-1111
____________________
2.
oblique
references to
the circumstances
signed the
Davis had
extent
that the
under which
ALJ's efforts to
and stood
Davis
determine if
behind it.
To the
introducing, albeit
before
the uncertainty
signing
it,
of whether Davis
the
Commission
read the
failed
to
action in
Commission
faith.
not only
can
the
"factor,"
analysis
bad
or not he
the
Commission
thereof
Moreover,
in
even if the
implicitly
sustaining
the
adopted
bad
faith
the
ALJ's
findings.
analysis, but had concluded instead that Davis never read the
complaint
before
signing it,
Davis's
certification that
attested
to the
this
still would
signature
he had read
truth
conclusion
of its
12.12(b), 12.13(2).
-1212
on
the
it, knew
complaint
was
its contents,
statements.
17
C.F.R.
a
and
Without
12.314(c) provide
acts in bad faith, the ALJ may require him to pay his
(CCH)
1979); 17 C.F.R.
12.314(c).
To the
the party and his attorney acted in bad faith, and the
-1313
We
-1414
fee award.
the fact that CII and Carr elected the formal decisional
assessable.
By failing to draw
it
Regulation
CFTC
-1515
decisional proceeding.
17 C.F.R.
12.314(c).
It does not
The Commission
failed to do so here.
We simply
doing so.
order.
-1616
III.
III.
____
Conclusion
Conclusion
__________
-1717