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|
|Apr 8, 2010||200500224102||Order Limiting the Dissemination of Personal, Confidential Information||Disciplinary Order|
|Dec 20, 2011||2005001988201||Mark B. Beloyan and Tradespot Markets, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 6, 2010||2005001988201||Amended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Mark B. Beloyan and Tradespot Markets, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jun 18, 2008||2005001919501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Jennifer Jordan||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 16, 2007||2005001919501||Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Complainant's Motion for Summary Disposition and Denying Respondent's Motion for Summary Disposition||Disciplinary Order|
|Aug 21, 2009||2005001919501||Jennifer Jordan||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 13, 2007||2005001919501||Order Denying Respondent's Motion to Compel Production of Exculpatory and Other Material Documents||Disciplinary Order|
|Aug 14, 2007||2005001819101||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Domestic Securities, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 28, 2006||2005001819101||Order Granting Complainant's Motion to Strike in Part the Introduction to Respondent's Answer||Disciplinary Order|
|Oct 2, 2008||2005001819101||Domestic Securities Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jun 12, 2008||2005001798201||Order Denying Respondent's Motion for Summary Disposition||Disciplinary Order|
|Aug 15, 2008||2005001729501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Gerald J. Kesner||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 26, 2010||2005001729501||Gerald J. Kesner||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 28, 2007||2005001514501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|Sep 22, 2009||2005001502703||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Ronald E. Hardy, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 11, 2007||2005001449202||Interim Scheduling and Case Management Order||Disciplinary Order|
|Feb 5, 2007||2005001305701||Order Denying the Respondents' Motion for a More Definite Statement||Disciplinary Order|
|Feb 20, 2007||2005001305701||Order Denying Respondents' Three Discovery Motions||Disciplinary Order|
|Feb 28, 2007||2005001305701||Order Setting Philadelphia, Pa as Venue for Disciplinary Proceeding||Disciplinary Order|
|Oct 6, 2008||2005001305701||Harvest Capital Investments, LLC and Dennis Cotto||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 27, 2007||2005001305701||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Harvest Capital Investments, LLC and Dennis Cotto||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 10, 2008||2005001085001||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Warren K. Hansen||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 2, 2007||2005000960801||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Mangri Mohini Harlal||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 12, 2009||2005000879302||Amended Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Legacy Trading Co., LLC and Mark Uselton||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 8, 2010||2005000879302||Legacy Trading Co., LLC and Mark Alan Uselton||Disciplinary Decision|