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|
|May 23, 2001||CAF000013||Order Granting Complainant's Motion to Preclude the Introduction of Expert Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|May 21, 2001||CAF000013||Order Denying Respondents' Motion For The Production Of Documents From Nasdaq And Requiring The Complainant To File A Declaration Certifying That It Has Complied With Rule 9251||Disciplinary Order|
|May 17, 2001||C8A990025||Timothy James Fergus, Frank Thomas Devine, & Richard Alan Blake||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 17, 2001||C02990052||Shailesh B. Patel||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 17, 2001||CAF000045||Order Denying Respondents' Motion to Compel the Production of Documents and for a List of Withheld Documents||Disciplinary Order|
|May 16, 2001||C02990022||Joseph Gaetano Gerace||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 15, 2001||C3A990071||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Josephthal & Co., Inc., Dan D. Purjes, and Paul H. Fitzgerald||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 14, 2001||C05000021||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Charles K. Waddell||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 14, 2001||C10000140||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Mario J. Coniglione||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 11, 2001||C05010012||Order Granting Respondent's Request for Production of Documents Pursuant to NASD Procedural Rule 9252||Disciplinary Order|
|May 10, 2001||C3A000056||Order Denying Motion to Dismiss||Disciplinary Order|
|May 2, 2001||C10000116||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Vincent P. Coniglione||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 1, 2001||C3A000056||Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 30, 2001||C10000139||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Frank A. Persico||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 26, 2001||ARB000026||Non-Summary Suspension Proceeding ARB000026||Expedited Decision, Non-Summary Proceeding|
|Apr 26, 2001||C9A990007||Daniel D. Manoff||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 26, 2001||ARB000011||Non-Summary Suspension Consolidated Proceeding ARB000011||Expedited Decision, Non-Summary Proceeding|
|Apr 20, 2001||C3A000056||Order Denying Motion to Dismiss, in Part, Deferring Decision on Motion, in Part, and Directing Enforcement to Supplement its Opposition||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 20, 2001||C10010004||Order Granting Complainant's Motion to Amend the Complaint; Denying Complainant's Motion for Leave to File a Reply to Respondent's Opposition to Motion to Amend; and Denying Respondent's Motion to Sever||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 19, 2001||C8A990071||Respondent Firm 1, Respondent 2 & Respondent 3||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|
|Apr 18, 2001||CAF000015||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Josephthal & Co., Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 17, 2001||CAF000013||Order Denying Respondents' Motion for Summary Disposition and Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Cause of Action and Supplementing Order Granting Complainant's Motion for Summary Disposition on Cause Four of the Complaint Against Respondents||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 6, 2001||C07000084||Order Denying Respondent's Motion to Reconsider and to Set Aside Default Decision||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 3, 2001||C9A990029||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Shannon Johnson||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 22, 2001||C07000058||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Russell Montgomery, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|