Adjudication and Decisions
When FINRA determines that violations of securities rules have occurred and formal disciplinary action is necessary, the Enforcement Department or Market Regulation Department files a complaint with the Office of Hearing Officers (OHO).
The Office arranges a three-person panel to hear the case. The panel is chaired by a hearing officer who is an employee of the Office of Hearing Officers. The Chief Hearing Officer appoints two industry panelists, drawn primarily from a pool of current and former securities industry members of FINRA's District Committees, as well as its Market Regulation Committee, former members of FINRA's National Adjudicatory Council (NAC) and former FINRA Governors.
At the hearing, the parties present evidence for the panel to determine whether a firm or individual has engaged in conduct that violates FINRA rules, SEC regulations or federal securities laws. In reaching its decision, the hearing panel also considers previous court, SEC, and NAC decisions to determine if violations occurred. The NAC is the national committee which reviews initial decisions rendered in FINRA disciplinary and membership proceedings.
For each case, the hearing panel will issue a written decision explaining the reasons for its ruling and consult the FINRA Sanction Guidelines to determine the appropriate sanctions if violations have occurred. FINRA also, when feasible and appropriate, can order firms and individuals to make restitution to harmed customers.
Under FINRA's disciplinary procedures, a firm or individual has the right to appeal a hearing panel decision to the NAC, or the NAC may on its own initiate a review of a decision. On appeal, the NAC will determine if a hearing panel's findings were legally correct, factually supported and consistent with FINRA's Sanction Guidelines. While a panel decision is on appeal, the sanction is not enforced against the firm or individual.
Unless FINRA's Board of Governors decides to review the NAC's appellate decision, that decision represents FINRA's final action. A firm or individual can appeal FINRA's decision to the SEC and then to federal court.
|Date of Decision||Proceeding No.||Title||Type|
|Jul 30, 2009||E102004083704||Marc Winters||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 16, 2007||E102004083703||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Harvey M. Schwartz||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 12, 2008||E102004083702||John C. Correro||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 13, 2007||E102004083702||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. John Christopher Correro||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 23, 2006||E102003130804||Order Regarding Respondent's Pre-Hearing Submissions||Disciplinary Order|
|Sep 13, 2006||E102003130804||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Michael Francis O'Neill||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 26, 2010||E102003025201||Robert Conway and Kakit Ng||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 13, 2006||E102003025201||Order Granting Motion to Adjourn Proceeding and Setting Pre-Hearing Conference||Disciplinary Order|
|Jun 28, 2007||E102003025201||Procedural Pre-Hearing Order||Disciplinary Order|
|Jun 27, 2007||E102003025201||Order Regarding Pre-Hearing Motions||Disciplinary Order|
|May 17, 2007||E102003025201||Order Denying Respondents' Request for Leave to Offer Expert Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 23, 2008||E102003025201||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Robert Conway and Kakit Ng||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jun 11, 2007||E102003025201||Order Ruling on (1) Objections to Witnesses, (2) Motion to Substitute Exhibit, (3) Motions in Limine, and (4) Motions to Strike the Respondents' Affirmative Defenses||Disciplinary Order|
|Dec 19, 2005||E1020010426-04||Order Denying Motion for More Definite Statement||Disciplinary Order|
|Jan 16, 2009||E072005017201||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. John B. Busacca III||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 16, 2009||E072005017201||John B. Busacca, III||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 11, 2006||E072004088501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Fausto E. Callava||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 22, 2006||E072004087801||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Hung The Nguyen||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 27, 2007||E072004072501||Andrew J. Hardin||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 8, 2006||E072004072501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Andrew J. Hardin||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 16, 2007||E072004044201||Ralph Merhi||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 14, 2006||E072004006101 and 2005002392101||Order Denying Respondent Firm's Motions to Consolidate||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 5, 2010||E052005007501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Sterne, Agee & Leach, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 21, 2008||E0420030634-04||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. John M. Repine||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 1, 2006||E0220030845-01||Order Requiring Counsel to File Notice Pursuant to Rule 9142||Disciplinary Order|