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.

Appeals Process

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 Decisionsort ascending Proceeding No. Title Type
Jun 8, 2000 C07990033 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Len K. Furman Disciplinary Decision
Jun 6, 2000 C9A990007 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Daniel D. Manoff Disciplinary Decision
Jun 5, 2000 C05990034 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Charles Douglas Gulley, Jr. Disciplinary Decision
Jun 2, 2000 CAF980029 Aleksandr Shvarts Disciplinary Decision
Jun 1, 2000 CMS970027 Jerome E. Rosen Disciplinary Decision
May 17, 2000 C10970143 Order Denying Respondents' Motion to Compel Production of Information and Documents from Customer Witnesses Disciplinary Order
May 5, 2000 C10990212 Order Granting Enforcement's Motion to Consolidate Disciplinary Order
May 5, 2000 CAF990007 Order Denying Respondents' Motion Seeking Leave to Introduce Expert Witness Testimony Disciplinary Order
Apr 24, 2000 C8A990032 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Marcus K. Hughes and Christopher Aden Disciplinary Decision
Apr 20, 2000 C10970141 Marlowe Robert Walker, III Disciplinary Decision
Apr 19, 2000 C07990016 James O. Baxter, Jr. Disciplinary Decision
Apr 18, 2000 C3A980069 Michael A. Usher Disciplinary Decision
Apr 14, 2000 CMS960174 Vincent M. Carrella Disciplinary Decision
Apr 10, 2000 C01990002 Bernard San Juan Rondez Disciplinary Decision
Apr 6, 2000 C07960105 Wayne B. Vaughan Disciplinary Decision
Apr 4, 2000 C0500006 Order Granting in Part Respondent Motion for More Definite Statement Disciplinary Order
Mar 28, 2000 C1000010 Order Granting Enforcement's Motion for Leave to Withhold From Production Certain Documents Disciplinary Order
Mar 27, 2000 C10970176 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Robert FitzPatrick Disciplinary Decision
Mar 26, 2000 CAF980002 Order Regarding Respondents' Motion to Preclude Designation of Transcripts; Respondents' Motion for a Protective Order; and Enforcement's Motion for Post-Hearing Submissions in Excess of Twenty-Five Pages Disciplinary Order
Mar 19, 2000 C10990014 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Stephen Earl Prout Disciplinary Decision
Mar 10, 2000 C02980085 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Robert Tretiak Disciplinary Decision
Mar 10, 2000 C3A990067 Order Denying Respondent Second Motion for More Definite Statement Disciplinary Order
Mar 9, 2000 C8A990032 Order Vacating Default Against Respondent, Granting Complainant Leave to Re-Serve the Complaint, and Setting a Briefing Schedule on the Issue of Jurisdiction Disciplinary Order
Mar 9, 2000 C3A990031 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Charles W. Testino Disciplinary Decision
Mar 6, 2000 C8B990036 Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Samuel Wereb Disciplinary Decision

Pages