FAHN - last part
12/15/98: 12/02/93 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): OMISSION OF FACTS;
MISREPRESENTATION; SUITABILITY. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY
DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$10,000.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$0.00; ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00;
PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS
HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-04305]
12/15/98: 11/15/93 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT FILED AUGUST 12, 1993; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC.
(MEMBER FIRM) WAS FINED $250.00 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III,
SECTION 1 OF THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT CERTAIN
INDIVIDUALS UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE
ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD.
[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS930042 AWC]
12/15/98: 5/05/93 IOWA FINE
ORDERED TO PAY A CIVIL PENALTY OF $500 BY THE STATE OF IOWA WHICH THE STATE
ALLEGED THE FIRM FILED AUDITED FINANCIALS LATE.
12/15/98: 3/02/93 NYSE ARBITRATION
13
SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION
INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):
UNAUTHORIZED TRADES AND OVERCHARGED OF COMMISSIONS. THE AWARD INCLUDED:
ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $24,238.03, AMOUNT
AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $2,700.00 AND DEPOSIT OF $400.00 PLUS FILING FEE OF
$120.00. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 1992-002532]
12/15/98: 1/06/93 GEORGIA CEASE AND DESIST ORDER
THE STATE OF GEORGIA ISSUED A CEASE AND DESIST ORDER AGAINST THE FIRM FOR
FAILURE TO SUPERVISE THEIR SALESMEN, ALLOWING THEM TO OFFER FOR SALE
SECURITIES TO RESIDENTS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA PRIOR TO BECOMING REGISTERED
WITH THE COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES. [DOCKET/CASE NO. 50-92-0505]
12/15/98: 12/22/92 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC
CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY;
CHURNING; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE. THE
AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$50,000.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$50,000.00 JOINTLY AND
SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 91-03843]
12/15/98: 12/21/92 NYSE ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A
PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):
MISREPRESENTATIONS, UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS, FAILURE TO FOLLOW CUSTOMER'S
INSTRUCTIONS AND SELF DEALING. ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER $19,160.00, CUSTOMER'S CLAIM IS DENIED. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO.
1992-002597]
12/15/98: 10/05/92 GEORGIA CEASE AND DESIST ORDER
THE FIRM WAS ORDERED BY THE GEORGIA SECURITIES COMMISSION TO CEASE AND DESIST
ALL OFFERS FOR SALE AND SALES IN AND FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA IN VIOLATION OF
THE STATE SECURITIES ACT OF 1973 AS AMENDED. [GEORGIA DOCKET CASE NO.
50-92-0505]
12/15/98: 6/30/92 NASD ARBITRATION
14
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC
CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): EXECUTIONS-FAILURE
TO EXECUTE; MISREPRESENTATION; ACCOUNT RELATED-ERRORS-CHARGES. THE AWARD
INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$120,000.00,
AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$60,000.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION
CASE NO. 91-03675]
12/15/98: 6/26/92 NYSE CENSURE AND FINE
CONSENT ORDER; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDWARD A. VINER &
CO., INC.) WAS CENSURED AND FINED FOR $200,000 AND AN UNDERTAKING BY THE NEW
YORK STOCK EXCHANGE FOR VIOLATION OF THE FOLLOWING SECURITIES EXCHANGE RULES:
VIOLATED SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC) REGULATION 240.15C3-1 BY
COMPUTING ITS NET CAPITAL INACCURATELY; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(E) IN
THAT IT INCORRECTLY COMPUTED THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO BE DEPOSITED INTO ITS
SPECIAL RESERVE BANK ACCOUNT, AND FAILED TO MAINTAIN ITS SPECIAL RESERVE
ACCOUNT AT THE LEVEL REQUIRED BY THE REGULATION; VIOLATED REGULATION
240.15C3-3(I) IN THAT IT FAILED TO NOTIFY THE SEC AND THE EXCHANGE THAT IT
FAILED TO DESPOSIT THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO BE DEPOSITED IN ITS SPECIAL RESERVE
ACCOUNT; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(B)(1) IN THAT IT DID NOT OBTAIN AND
MAINTAIN THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OR CONTROL OF FULLY PAID AND EXCESS MARGIN
SECURITIES; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(D) IN THAT IT FAILED TO REDUCE TO
ITS POSSESSION OR CONTROL THE REQUIRED QUANTITY OF FULLY PAID AND EXCESS
MARGIN SECURITIES; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(M) IN THAT IT FAILED TO
PURCHASE IMMEDIATELY SECURITIES OF LIKE KIND TO THOSE SOLD BY A CUSTOMER AND
NOT OBTAINED FROM THE CUSTOMER WITHIN TEN DAYS AFTER SETTLEMENT DATE; VIOLATED
240.17A-3 IN THAT ITS CNS AND/OR SOME OTHER ACCOUNTS HAD NOT BEEN RECONCILED
ON A CURRENT BASIS; VIOLATED RULE 382(A) BY ENTERING INTO A CARRYING AGREEMENT
WITH ANOTHER BROKER WHICH AGREEMENT BECAME EFFECTIVE PRIOR TO BEING SUBMITTED
TO THE EXCHANGE; VIOLATED RULE 401 IN THAT IT: ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT TO
CARRY ACCOUNTS WHEN IT LACKED THE CAPACITY TO CLEAR THE ADDITIONAL BUSINESS,
PERMITTED CERTAIN CUSTOMERS TO ENGAGE IN OTC TRANSACTIONS AT PRICES NOT
REASONABLY RELATED TO PREVAILING MARKETS AND DID NOT HAVE PROCEDURES TO DETECT
OR PREVENT SUCH TRANSACTIONS, DID NOT HAVE PROCEDURES DESIGNED TO BRING
CERTAIN PRACTICES TO THE ATTENTION OF SENIOR MANAGEMENT, PERMITTED OPTION
TRADING IN ACCOUNTS WHICH HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY APPROVED, IMPROPERLY CANCELLED
AND/OR REBILLED A PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS, AND PERMITTED TWO SUPERVISORY PERSONS
TO APPROVE ACCOUNT DESIGNATION CHANGES FOR ORDERS THEY ENTERED; VIOLATED RULE
431(A) BY PERMITTING A CUSTOMER TO EFFECT NEW TRANSACTIONS WITHOUT A REQUIRED
DEPOSIT OF FUNDS; VIOLATED RULE 431(B) BY PERMITTING CUSTOMERS TO MAINTAIN AN
INADEQUATE LEVEL OF MARGIN; VIOLATED RULE 431(D)(9) IN THAT CUSTOMERS EFFECTED
CASH TRANSACTIONS WHERE THE COST OF SECURITIES PURCHASED WAS MET BY THE SALE
OF THE SAME SECURITIES; VIOLATED RULE 432(B) IN THAT CUSTOMERS EFFECTED
TRANSACTIONS REQUIRING MARGIN AND THEN FURNISHED THE MARGIN BY LIQUIDATION OF
COMMITMENTS; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.4(C) OF REGULATION T BY PERMITTING
CUSTOMERS TO DEFER THE FURNISHING OF MARGIN; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.4(D) BY
FAILING TO TAKE APPROPRIATE LIQUIDATION ACTION; VIOLATED REGULATION 220.8(B)
15
BY FAILING TO OBTAIN FULL CASH PAYMENT IN CASH ACCOUNTS ON TIME; VIOLATED
REGULATION 220.8(B)(4) BY FAILING TO TAKE APPROPRIATE LIQUIDATION ACTION;
VIOLATED REGULATION 220.8(C) BY FAILING TO WITHDRAW THE PRIVILEGE OF DELAYING
PAYMENT BEYOND TRADE DATE AS REQUIRED; VIOLATED RULE 410 BY PERMITTING A
CHANGE IN ACCOUNT DESIGNATION WITHOUT RECORDING THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE;
VIOLATED RULE 405 IN THAT DOCUMENTS WERE MISSING FROM ITS NEW ACCOUNT
DEPARTMENT; VIOLATED RULE 410(A) BY PERMITTING ACCOUNT DESIGNATION CHANGES TO
BE AUTHORIZED BY A PERSON WHO WAS NOT QUALIFIED AS A C SUPERVISORY PERSON;
VIOLATED RULE 722(C) BY FAILING TO MAINTAIN REQUIRED OPTION DOCUMENTATION AT A
BRANCH OFFICE; VIOLATED RULE 722(D) IN THAT IT TRANSACTED OPTIONS BUSINESS
WITH THE PUBLIC FROM A BRANCH OFFICE, THE PRINCIPAL SUPERVISOR OF WHICH, WAS
NOT A REGISTERED OPTIONS PRINCIPAL; VIOLATED RULE 342(A) IN THAT IT FAILED TO
PROPERLY SUPERVISE CERTAIN OF ITS BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND CARRIED DISCRETIONARY
ACCOUNTS NOT SUBJECT TO THE DESIGNATED SUPERVISORY REVIEWS OF SUCH ACCOUNTS;
AND VIOLATED RULE 342(B) BY FAILING TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE SUPERVISION AND
CONTROL AND FAILING TO HAVE IN PLACE A SEPARATE SYSTEM OF FOLLOW UP AND
REVIEW. [NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE DOCKET/CASE NO. 92-68]
12/15/98: 6/05/92 AMEX ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A
PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): FAILURE TO
SELL CERTAIN STOCK. ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$7,208.54; CLAIMS AGAINST THE FIRM WERE DENIED.
12/15/98: 5/12/92 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): UNAUTHORIZED TRADING;
SUITABILITY. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$11,925.00; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-;
ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION
CASE NO. 91-00792]
12/15/98: 1/30/92 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC
CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT
RELATED-ERRORS-CHARGES; TRADING DISPUTES-BUY IN. THE AWARD INCLUDED:
ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$101,053.22, AMOUNT
AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$44,189.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE
NO. 90-00521]
16
12/15/98: 12/21/91 NYSE ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A
PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):
UNSUITABILITY; FRAUD; FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION.
ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$89,629.00; CUSTOMER'S
CLAIMS WERE DISMISSED. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 001077]
12/15/98: 12/12/91 NYSE ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A
PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):
UNSUITABILITY, FRAUD, FAILURE TO SUPERVISE AND NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION.
ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $89,629.00, CUSTOMER'S
CLAIM IS DISMISSED. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 1991-001077]
12/15/98: 7/19/91 CBOE ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF A CHICAGO BOARD OPTIONS EXCHANGE (CBOE) ARBITRATION AWARD. THE
ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING
DISPUTE(S): CUSTOMER SEEKS TO RECOVER MONEY DUE TO THE ACTIONS, OMISSIONS OR
ERRORS OF THE RESPONDENTS. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,
AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $3,808.75. [CBOE DOCKET/CASE NO. 91 NM 2]
12/15/98: 5/18/90 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC
CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT
RELATED-OTHER. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED
BY CUSTOMER-$34,505.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$30,255.00; OTHER COSTS,
AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$500.00. [NASD
ARBITRATION CASE NO. 89-01049]
12/15/98: 3/19/90 NYSE ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION
INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):
UNAUTHORIZED LIQUIDATION OF CUSTOMER'S MARGIN ACCOUNT WHICH RESULTED IN LOSSES
17
OF SUBSEQUENT APPRECIATION GAINS AND ADDITIONAL BROKERAGE FEES. THE AWARD
INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $17,873.57
PLUS COSTS AND BROKERAGE FEES, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $11,526.00 INCLUSIVE
OF INTEREST THROUGH THIS DATE. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 1990]
12/15/98: 11/09/89 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO
EXECUTE; ACCOUNT RELATED-MARGIN CALLS. THE AWARD INCLUDED:
ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$152,713.45; OTHER
COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN
FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 88-01261]
12/15/98: 7/26/89 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): UNAUTHORIZED TRADING;
MISREPRESENTATION. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT
ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$2,400.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD
ARBITRATION CASE NO. 87-00711]
12/15/98: 3/10/89 NYSE FINE
THE FIRM WAS FINED $2,500 BY THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE FOR VIOLATION OF
EXCHANGE RULE 132.30 AND FAILED TO SUBMIT AUDIT TRAIL DATA TO QUALIFIED
CLEARING AGENCY REGARDING STOCK TRANSACTIONS FOR THE WEEKS OF AUGUST 1,
SEPTEMBER 12 AND OCTOBER 17, 1988.
12/15/98: 4/21/87 CBOE FINE
OFFER OF SETTLEMENT; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC. (FIRM) [FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDWARD
A. VINER & CO.] WAS FINED $500 BY THE BUSINESS CONDUCT COMMITTEE OF THE
CHICAGO BOARD OPTIONS (CBOE) IN VIOLATION OF THE CBOE EXCHANGE RULES. THE CBOE
ALLEGED THAT FIRM FAILED TO SUBMIT TO THE EXCHANGE ON BEHALF OF ONE OF ITS
NON-MEMBER CUSTOMERS A CBOE EXERCISE ADVICE FORM FOR THE CUSTOMER'S EXERCISE
OF 400 STANDARD & POOR'S 100 STOCK INDEX ("OEX") AUG 220 CALL OPTION
CONTRACTS. ON AUGUST 13, 1986 VINER FAILED TO TIME STAMP THE INTERNAL EXERCISE
NOTICE IT PREPARED FOR THE EXERCISE OF THE OEX OPTION CONTRACTS REFERRED TO
ABOVE. THE ACTS, PRACTICES AND CONDUCT DESCRIBED ABOVE CONSTITUTE SEPARATE
VIOLATIONS OF EXCHANGE RULE 11.1 BY FIRM. [CBOE FILE NO. 87-0006]
18
12/15/98: 12/09/86 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT FILED DECEMBER 9, 1986; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC.
[FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDWARD A. VINER & CO., INC.] (MEMBER FIRM) WAS FINED $1,000
BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART I, SECTION C.3.(A) OF SCHEDULE D OF THE
ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT MEMBER FIRM ENTERED QUOTATIONS I INTO THE NASDAQ
SYSTEM ON 9/29/86, 10/2/86, AND 10/3/86 THAT WERE NOT REASONABLY RELATED TO
THE PREVAILING MARKET. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-456-AWC]
12/15/98: 4/06/82 NYSE FINE
STIPULATION OF FACTS AND CONSENT TO PENALTY; FINED $25,000 BY THE NEW YORK
STOCK EXCHANGE. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE EXCHANGE'S ALLEGATIONS, THE
FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: THE FIRM VIOLATED EXCHANGE RULE
343(b) IN CONNECTION WITH SUPERVISION AND CONTROL OF THE ACTIVITIES OF ONE OF
ITS EMPLOYEES; VIOLATED EXCHANGE RULE 54 IN THAT IT PERMITTED AN EMPLOYEE WHO
WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE EXCHANGE TO TRANSACT BUSINESS ON THE BOND FLOOR; AND
VIOLATED EXCHANGE RULE 120 IN THAT IT FAILED TO ADHERE TO THE PRINCIPLES OF
GOOD PRACTICES IN THE CONDUCT OF ITS BUSINESS AFFAIRS IN CONNECTION WITH THE
PURCHASES AND SALES OF CERTAIN BONDS. IN ADDITION TO THE $25,000 FINE, THE
FIRM CONSENTED TO ANCILLARY REQUIREMENTS WHEREBY IT AGREED TO (1) WITHDRAWAL
OF ITS EMPLOYEES FROM THE BOND FLOOR OF THE EXCHANGE; (2) PREPARATION,
ADOPTION AND CIRCULATION OF NEW WRITTEN POLICIES DESIGNED TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE
WITH ALL EXCHANGE RULES INVOLVING THE SUPERVISION OF THE ACTIVITIES OF
EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN BOND TRADING; AND (3) ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE FIRM'S
COMPLIANCE POLICIES WITH RESPECT TO ON-FLOOR AND OFF-FLOOR BOND TRADING AND
PROCEDURES FOR TWO YEARS. [NYSE DECISION NOS. 82-30 AND 82-31]
12/15/98: 11/18/71 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
DECISION RENDERED IN COMPLAINT FILED 10/30/70 BY THE NASD AGAINST FAHNESTOCK &
CO., INC. (MEMBER FIRM) ON 1/13/71 WHEREIN MEMBER FIRM IS FINED $1,000 TO BE
FINAL 2/12/71. ON 2/12/71 COMPLAINT WAS CALLED BEFORE THE B/G FOR REVIEW. DBCC
DECISION IS STAYED. B/G DECISION RENDERED 10/1/71 WHEREIN FINDINGS MADE BY
DBCC ARE AFFIRMED BUT PENALTIES ARE INCREASED. MEMBER FIRM IS CENSURED AND
FINED $1,500. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NY-1309]
12/15/98: 10/23/70 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
FAHNESTOCK & CO. WAS CENSURED ANF FINED $1200 BY THE NASD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO.
19
NY-1234]
20 |
