A lawyer for two Florida planners who are suing the CFP Board was grilled at an appeals court hearing Wednesday over a claim at the heart of their case.
Jeffrey S. York, who is representing Jeffrey and Kimberly Camarda, argued that the CFP Board arbitrarily targeted the couple for disciplinary action over improper use of the fee-only compensation description.
The case was
dismissed last year by a federal district judge, who ruled that the CFP Board has the latitude to set and enforce its own rules. The Camardas are appealing that decision.
In his argument before a three-judge panel, Mr. York said the CFP Board went after his clients while ignoring similar violations by other CFP mark holders.
“It was unfair because they were singled out,” Mr. York said.
In a
motion prior to the hearing, Mr. York asked the appeals court to unseal documents he said showed the CFP Board engaged in selective enforcement.
The documents were not opened during Wednesday's 30-minute hearing.
Judge Laurence Silberman, a senior judge on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C.Circuit, expressed skepticism about the selective enforcement argument.
“That happens every time” an organization applies its rules, Mr. Silberman said.
He questioned why the CFP Board shouldn't prevent advisers who accept commissions from calling themselves fee-only.
“Why is that an unreasonable position?” Mr. Silberman said.
Mr. Silberman also pressed Mr. York to cite a similar case to the Camardas that would apply in the D.C. Circuit.
“I'm having difficulty seeing how you have a major substantive claim,” Mr. Silberman said.
Throughout the hearing, Mr. York returned to his argument that the CFP Board unfairly made an example of the Camardas.
“That should be [given] its day in court,” Mr. York said.
It is not clear when the appeals panel will rule on the case.
