In this post back in January I asked:

"Don't you hate it when your wife ignores your specific "entreaties" that she not share inside information about your publicly-traded company with her brother, and gets herself sued by the SEC?"

Well, in fairness to the women SLW readers out there I think I must now similarly ask:

Don't you hate it when you tell your husband during dinner conversation that the company by which you are employed intends to acquire another public company, and your husband--without your knowledge--then goes out and purchases stock in the public company to be acquired and gets himself sued by the SEC?

That is what is alleged in the SEC's settled insider trading case filed October 12 against Robert Petrosky.  Also of note in that case is that the settlement only requires Mr. Petrosky, who profited $41,381.85 through his trading, to pay a civil penalty of $20,690.91 (equal to one-half of his profits) in addition to disgorging his trading profits.  It is highly unusual for a defendant in a settled case to get off with anything less than a penalty equal to the amount of the illegal profits.  The SEC noted in its announcement of the settlement, however, that

In accepting Petrosky's settlement, the Commission took into account his significant cooperation in the staff's investigation, including the fact that he voluntarily came forward, reported his trades, and worked promptly with the staff to resolve the matter.