In the Matter of Arthur James Huff

Exchange Act Release No. 29017, 1991 WL 296561 (1991)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In the Matter of Arthur James Huff

Securities and Exchange Commission
Exchange Act Release No. 29017, 1991 WL 296561 (1991)

  • Written by Sharon Feldman, JD

Facts

Arthur Huff (defendant) was a vice president and senior registered options principal (SROP) in the compliance department of PaineWebber Incorporated (PW) in New York. Huff was responsible for developing, implementing, and overseeing firm-wide options-related procedures. Dennis Greenman was a salesman in PW’s Miami, Florida, branch office. Philip Huber was the Miami branch manager. Prior to Huff’s arrival, PW’s compliance department reviewed Greenman’s activities and, after the legal department approved the account documentation for Greenman’s accounts, concluded that any concerns had been satisfactorily resolved. After Huff arrived, the compliance director gave him a substantial number of files, including the department’s file on Greenman, and instructed him to keep on top of Greenman’s activities and follow through if any question arose. Huff reviewed Greenman’s file and selectively monitored Greenman’s accounts but did not consider Greenman a compliance concern because the compliance department had addressed and resolved the issues. Greenman subsequently defrauded his clients of over $7 million by engaging in unauthorized options trading and sending clients fictitious account statements. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (plaintiff) sanctioned Huber and the Miami office’s regional manager for failing to supervise Greenman and instituted an administrative proceeding against Huff. An administrative-law judge found that Huff failed reasonably to supervise Greenman, with a view to preventing his violations of the securities laws, and Huber, with a view to preventing his deficient supervision of Greenman. Huff appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Breeden, Roberts, Commissioners)

Concurrence (Lochner, Schapiro, Commissioners)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 747,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 747,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 747,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership