Wiest v. Lynch

Jeffrey Wiest (plaintiff) worked in Tyco's (defendant) accounting department. Wiest emailed his supervisor questioning the propriety of certain expenditures. Shortly after, Tyco fired Wiest. Wiest sued Tyco, asserting that his discharge was in retaliation for his reports of improper expenditures, in violation of § 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (the act). Tyco moved to dismiss. The trial court, citing Platone v. FLYI, Inc., ARB 04–154, held that for Wiest’s communication to be protected, he was required to show that the communication (1) definitively and specifically related to a rule listed in § 806, (2) expressed an objectively reasonable belief that the company intentionally misrepresented facts, and (3) reflected a reasonable belief of an existing violation. The court found that Wiest failed to satisfy this standard. Thus, the court dismissed Wiest’s compliant. In his motion for reconsideration, Wiest argued that the Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board (the board) overruled the definitive and specific standard in favor of a reasonable belief standard in Sylvester v. Parexel Int'l LLC, ARB 07–123. Wiest argued that he was entitled to reconsideration because Sylvester was an intervening change in controlling law, and that the trial court’s reliance on Platone was a clear error of law. The trial court disagreed and ruled against Wiest. Wiest appealed.