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 28, 2015||2009016159102||Warren Forest||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 4, 2015||2009016159110||Anthony Spagnolo, III||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 4, 2015||2009016159111||Brian Sanders||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 23, 2015||2009016317701||James E. Rooney, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 19, 2013||2009016317701||Amended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. The Dratel Group, Inc. and William M. Dratel||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 6, 2015||2009016317701||The Dratel Group, Inc. and William M. Dratel||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 8, 2011||2009016551301||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Freddy A. Medina||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 11, 2013||2009016764901||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Robert Durant Tucker||Disciplinary Decision|
|Dec 31, 2013||2009016764901||Robert Durant Tucker||Disciplinary Decision|
|Apr 29, 2015||2009017195204||Merrimac Corporate Securities, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 19, 2013||2009017195204||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Merrimac Corporate Securities, Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 18, 2010||20090173549||In the Matter of the Membership Continuance Application of Applicant Firm A||Membership Decision|
|Mar 22, 2012||2009017439601||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Timothy Joseph Golonka||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 4, 2013||2009017439601||Timothy Joseph Golonka||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 15, 2017||2009017440201||APPEALED: Louis Ottimo||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jul 10, 2015||2009017440201||APPEALED: Louis Ottimo||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 12, 2009||2009017496501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Christopher J. Perrott||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 21, 2013||2009017527501||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Steven Robert Tomlinson||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 5, 2014||2009017527501||Steven R. Tomlinson||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 2, 2013||2009017529101||Order Denying Respondent’s Motion to Compel Production of Documents and a List of Withheld Documents||Disciplinary Order|
|May 2, 2013||2009017529101||Order Denying Respondent’s Motion to Compel Production of Documents and a List of Withheld Documents.||Disciplinary Order|
|Apr 25, 2011||2009017775601||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Meyers Associates, LP||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 7, 2011||2009017798201||Order Denying Respondent’s Motion for Stay of Hearing||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 24, 2011||2009017798201||Order Denying Respondent’s Motion for Leave to Offer Expert Testimony||Disciplinary Order|
|Jan 25, 2013||2009017798902||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Depatment of Enforcement v. Respondent 1 and Respondent 2||Redacted Decision|