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|
|Mar 3, 2006||CAF030014||CALLED FOR REVIEW: Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|Apr 4, 2013||20070094013||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|Dec 27, 2013||2011025506901||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Richard Hans Bach||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 28, 2012||2008012925001||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. The Dratel Group, Inc. and William M. Dratel||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 8, 2011||2008014621701||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Thomas Weisel Partners, LLC and Stephen H. Brinck, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Aug 2, 2012||20070094044||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Wedbush Securities Inc. and Edward W. Wedbush||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 30, 2013||2010024889501||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. William B. Fretz, Jr., John P. Freeman, and The Keystone Equities Group, LP||Disciplinary Decision|
|May 6, 2010||2005003610701||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. William J. Murphy, Carl M. Birkelbach, and Respondent Firm||Disciplinary Decision|
|Oct 7, 2013||20080150419||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Market Regulation v. Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|Jan 25, 2013||2009017798902||Extended Hearing Panel Decision in Depatment of Enforcement v. Respondent 1 and Respondent 2||Redacted Decision|
|Aug 5, 2016||ARB160012||Fairbridge Capital Markets||Expedited Decision|
|Jul 11, 2016||FPI160004||Fairbridge Capital Markets||Expedited Decision|
|Jul 30, 2010||2007010306901||FCS Securities and Dale Kleinser||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 15, 1997||C07970055||Final Pre-hearing Conference Order||Disciplinary Order|
|Mar 10, 1998||CMS970026||Final Pre-Hearing Conference Order, Order Granting Respondents' Motion to Adjourn the March 17, 1998 Hearing, Order Rejecting Respondents' Contested Offer of Settlement, and Order Denying the Department of Enforcement's Motion for Partial Summary Disposition||Disciplinary Order|
|Aug 10, 2015||SD-MCDC-022 et al.||First National Capital Markets, Inc., L.J. Hart and Company, Inc., Loop Capital Markets LLC, Martin Nelson & Co., Inc., Siebert, Brandford, Shank & Co., LLC, Smith Hayes Financial Services Corporation, Wells Nelson & Associates, LLC||Statutory Disqualification, Approvals|
|Aug 5, 1997||C10950101||Forbes, Walsh, Kelly & Co., Inc., & Robert E. Kelly||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 24, 2005||C3A030017||Fox & Company Investments, Inc. and James W. Moldermaker||Disciplinary Decision|
|Mar 9, 2015||2012030724101||APPEALED: Fox Financial Management Corporation, Brian A. Murphy, and James E. Rooney, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 6, 2017||2012030724101||Fox Financial Management Corporation, Brian A. Murphy, James E. Rooney, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Feb 9, 1999||C06950029||Frank J. Ingersoll||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 13, 2003||CAF000013||Frank J. Skelly, III and Craig H. Gross||Disciplinary Decision|
|Nov 22, 2004||CAF030008||Frank Peter Quattrone||Disciplinary Decision|
|Jan 3, 2002||C07000033||Franklyn Ross Michelin & L.H. Ross & Co., Inc.||Disciplinary Decision|
|Sep 25, 2015||2012034211301||APPEALED: Fuad Ahmed||Disciplinary Decision|