Adjudication & 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|
|December 31, 1997||C07930034||Escalator Securities, Inc., & Howard A. Scala||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 29, 1997||C3A950073||In the Matter of District Business Conduct Committee for District No. 3, Complainant, vs. Respondent Firm 1, Respondent 2, and Respondent 3||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|
|December 29, 1997||CAF970002||Order Regarding Respondent Motion for an Extension of Time to Answer||Disciplinary Order|
|December 26, 1997||CAF970001||Order Regarding Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings||Disciplinary Order|
|December 26, 1997||CAF970001||Order Regarding Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses||Disciplinary Order|
|December 23, 1997||CMS960247||In the Matter of Market Regulation Committee, Complainant, vs. Respondent Firm 1||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|
|December 22, 1997||C9A970019||Nicholas A. Rudi||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 19, 1997||C01970032||Order Striking Answer Filed on Behalf of and Directing the Department of Enforcement to Send a Second Notice of Complaint||Disciplinary Order|
|December 19, 1997||C10970172||Order to Show Cause Why Respondents Should Not Be Held in Default to Appear at at Pre-Hearing Conference||Disciplinary Order|
|December 18, 1997||C05970037||Order Granting Motion for Consolidation of Disciplinary Proceedings||Disciplinary Order|
|December 17, 1997||C01960003,C01960024||L.H. Alton & Company & Lewis Hunt Alton||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 15, 1997||C05970037||Order Denying Motion to Stay Proceeding||Disciplinary Order|
|December 15, 1997||CMS970028||Order Granting in Part Complainant's Motion to Exclude Witnesses and Amend Exhibit List||Disciplinary Order|
|December 09, 1997||C10970128||Order Regarding Department of Enforcements Contact with Respondent's Counsel||Disciplinary Order|
|December 01, 1997||C10960019||David A. Blech||Disciplinary Decision|
|December 01, 1997||CMS950042||In the Matter of Market Regulation Committee Complainant, v. Respondent 1||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|
|December 01, 1997||CMS950042||Victor H. Palma, Jr.||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 28, 1997||CAF970002||Order Denying Motions for More Definite Statement||Disciplinary Order|
|November 24, 1997||C07950030||In the Matter of Complainant 1, vs. Respondent Firm 1, and Respondent 2||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|
|November 20, 1997||C07960014||In the Matter of District Business Conduct Committee for District No. 7 Complainant, vs. Respondent 1, and Respondent 2, and Respondent 3||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|
|November 20, 1997||C07960065||Christopher K. Cutchens||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 20, 1997||C07960110||Darren L. Klemp||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 20, 1997||C10960116||Ilana Abby Knapp||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 20, 1997||C9A960030||Brian L. Shegon||Disciplinary Decision|
|November 18, 1997||C3A960014||In the Matter of District Business Conduct Committee for District No. 3 Complainant, vs. Respondent 1||Disciplinary Decision, Redacted Decision|