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 5, 2006||DFC050011||Decision in NASD Treasurer v. Lee Fisher||Expedited Decision, Rule 9550 Expedited Decisions|
|Sep 14, 2006||DFC060004||Order Setting a Pre-Hearing Conference||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 18, 2015||DFC140002||Order Granting Complainant's Motion to Dismiss Hearing Request||Expedited Order|
|Mar 18, 2015||DFC140002||Order Granting Complainant’s Motion to Dismiss Hearing Request||Disciplinary Order|
|Dec 8, 2016||DFC160001||McBarron Capital, LLC||Expedited Decision|
|Jun 12, 2017||DFC170003||Order Dismissing Request for Hearing||Expedited Order|
|Feb 6, 2018||DFC170004||APPEALED: Dakota Securities International, Inc.||Expedited Decision|
|Oct 6, 1999||DFC990003||Rule 9530 Suspension Proceeding DFC990003||Expedited Decision, Rule 9530 Suspension Decisions|
|Aug 3, 2006||E0120040071-01||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|Mar 15, 2006||E0220030425-01||Order Granting the Parties' Motions for Leave to Introduce Testimony of Handwriting Experts and Denying Respondent's Motion to Introduce Testimony of a Polygraph Examiner||Disciplinary Order|
|Jun 9, 2006||E0220030425-01||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Geoffrey Ortiz||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 11, 2007||E0220030425-01||Geoffrey Ortiz||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 17, 2006||E0220030425-01||Order Denying Respondent's Motion to Disqualify Expert Witness||Disciplinary Order|
|Sep 1, 2006||E0220030845-01||Order Requiring Counsel to File Notice Pursuant to Rule 9142||Disciplinary Order|
|Aug 18, 2006||E0220030845-01||Order Postponing Hearing||Disciplinary Order|
|Feb 21, 2008||E0420030634-04||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. John M. Repine||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 5, 2010||E052005007501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Sterne, Agee & Leach, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 14, 2006||E072004006101 and 2005002392101||Order Denying Respondent Firm's Motions to Consolidate||Disciplinary Order|
|Feb 16, 2007||E072004044201||Ralph Merhi||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 8, 2006||E072004072501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Andrew J. Hardin||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 27, 2007||E072004072501||Andrew J. Hardin||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 22, 2006||E072004087801||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Hung The Nguyen||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 11, 2006||E072004088501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Fausto E. Callava||Disciplinary Decision|
|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|