Adjudication & Decisions
When FINRA determines that violations of securities rules have occurred and formal disciplinary action is necessary, the Enforcement 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|
|November 26, 2004||C9B030076||Order Denying Respondent's Amended Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Motion to Dismiss||Disciplinary Order|
|November 24, 2004||C9A040020||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Paul V. Roddy, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 22, 2004||CAF030008||Frank Peter Quattrone||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 19, 2004||C05030036||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Sisung Securities Corporation et al.||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 16, 2004||C10040019||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Oscar Montenegro||Disciplinary Decision|
|October 28, 2004||CAF040020||Order Ruling On Pre-Hearing Motions||Disciplinary Order|
|October 19, 2004||ARB040033||Order Denying Respondent's Motion To Dismiss||Disciplinary Order|
|October 19, 2004||C07040048||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Lacy M. Walthall, III||Disciplinary Decision|
|October 12, 2004||CAF040056||Order Rejecting Filing||Disciplinary Order|
|October 12, 2004||SD04005||In the Matter of the Continued Association of X||Redacted Decision, Statutory Disqualification, Denials|
|October 12, 2004||C10030030||Hearing Panel Decision as to Respondent||Redacted Decision|
|October 12, 2004||CAF040020||Order Ruling On Pre-Hearing Motions||Disciplinary Decision|
|October 11, 2004||C8A030089||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Joseph Rogala||Disciplinary Decision|
|October 08, 2004||C06040017||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. David Allen Regis||Disciplinary Decision|
|October 06, 2004||CAF040002||Motion To Compel Compliance With Procedural Rule 9251 and Denying the Respondents' Motions for Sanctions and for Leave to File a Reply||Disciplinary Order|
|October 06, 2004||ARB040029||Order Deeming Defense as Abandoned, Hearing as Waived, and Nasd Suspension Notice as Final||Disciplinary Order|
|October 04, 2004||CAF030014||Order Partially Granting the Respondent's Motion to Reconsider Discovery Requests||Disciplinary Order|
|October 04, 2004||C9B040036||Order Granting Respondents Rule 9261(C) Request||Disciplinary Order|
|September 29, 2004||C9B040036||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement vs. Respondent 1 and Michael Blaise Doherty||Disciplinary Decision|
|September 28, 2004||C8A030099||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Timothy J. Duma||Disciplinary Decision|
|September 27, 2004||C9B040080||Order Denying Motion for a more Definite Statement||Disciplinary Order|
|September 23, 2004||C3A040009||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Michael Hanchar||Disciplinary Decision|
|September 22, 2004||C10030087||Hearing Panel Decision in Department of Enforcement v. Gilbert Alan Cardillo||Disciplinary Decision|
|September 17, 2004||CAF040056||Order Denying Respondent's Application to Vacate the Temporary Cease and Desist Order||Disciplinary Order|
|September 17, 2004||C01040003||Hearing Panel Decision as to Respondent||Redacted Decision|