MEMBER FIRM: M. H. MEYERSON & CO., INC.
BD NUMBER: 540
NASD Member Firm: M. H. MEYERSON & CO., INC.
BD Number: 540
12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION
12/15/98: 7/20/98 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND
FINED $12,500 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FOLLOWING VIOLATIONS
OCCURRED: SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF SEC RULE 11Ac1-1 ("SEC FIRM
QUOTE RULE"), NASD CONDUCT RULE 3320 AND NASD MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(b);
VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 3010 IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO
ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN, AND ENFORCE WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES REASONABLY
DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS AND
REGULATIONS CONCERNING FIRM QUOTE COMPLIANCE.[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS980067
AWC]hk
12/15/98: 2/03/98 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; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE. THE AWARD INCLUDED:
ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$26,000.00, AMOUNT
AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$9,950.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$50,000.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO
CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY;
ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO
CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 97-01165]
12/15/98: 11/24/97 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND
FINED $24,000 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FOLLOWING VIOLATIONS
OCCURRED: SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 4632(a)
AND 4632(f) IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO IDENTIFY TWO AGGREGATED TRANSACTION REPORTS
IN NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SECURITIES; AND FAILED TO DESIGNATE AS LATE TO ACT
ONE TRANSACTION IN A NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SECURITY; SEPARATE AND DISTINCT
1
VIOLATIONS OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 6620(a) AND 6620(c) IN THAT FIRM REPORTED
TO ACT THE INCORRECT PRICE IN ONE TRANSACTION, AND INCORRECTLY DESIGNATED TWO
TRANSACTIONS AS ".T" TO ACT IN OTC EQUITY SECURITIES; SEPARATE AND DISTINCT
VIOLATIONS OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 4642(a), 4642(c) AND 4642(f) IN THAT FIRM
INCORRECTLY DESIGNATED TWO TRANSACTIONS IN NASDAQ SMALLCAP SECURITIES AS ".T"
TO ACT AND FAILED TO IDENTIFY SUCH TRANSACTIONS AS LATE; FAILED TO DESIGNATE
AS LATE THREE TRANSACTIONS IN NASDAQ SMALLCAP SECURITIES; REPORTED THE
INCORRECT SYMBOL INDICATING WHETHER ONE TRANSACTION IN A NASDAQ SMALLCAP
SECURITY WAS A BUY, SELL, OR CROSS; AND INCORRECTLY AGGREGATED INDIVIDUAL
EXECUTIONS OF ORDERS IN A NASDAQ SMALLCAP SECURITY AT THE SAME PRICE, FOR
TRANSACTION REPORTING PURPOSES, INTO A SINGLE TRANSACTION REPORT WHEN ONE
INDIVIDUAL ORDER WAS 10,000 SHARES OR MORE; SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS
OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 6130(b) AND 6130(d) IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO ACCEPT OR
DECLINE TWO TRANSACTIONS IN ELIGIBLE SECURITIES WITHIN TWENTY MINUTES AFTER
EXECUTION; AND FAILED TO REPORT TO ACT THE CONTRA SIDE EXECUTING BROKER IN ONE
TRANSACTION IN AN ELIGLBLE SECURITY; VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULE 2110 AND
IM-2110-2 IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO CONTEMPORANEOUSLY EXECUTE ONE AND PARTIALLY
EXECUTE THREE CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDERS; VIOLATIONS OF SEC RULE 17a-3 AND NASD
CONDUCT RULE 3110 IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO SHOW THE TIME OF ENTRY ON MEMORANDA
OF 65 BROKERAGE ORDERS; VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 2320 IN THAT
ON JUNE 17, 1996, FIRM EXECUTED A TRANSACTION IN WHICH IT PURCHASED 35,000
SHARES FROM A CUSTOMER AT A PRICE BELOW THE INSIDE BID. FIRM FAILED TO USE
REASONABLE DILIGENCE TO ASCERTAIN THE BEST INTER-DEALER MARKET FOR ITS
CUSTOMER SO THAT THE RESULTANT PRICE WAS AS FAVORABLE AS POSSIBLE UNDER
PREVAILING MARKET CONDITIONS; FINALLY, VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110
AND 3010 IN THAT FRIM FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE WRITTEN
SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES REASONABLY DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH THE
APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS AND REGULATIONS REGARDING TRADE REPORTING, RECORD
KEEPING, AND THE LIMIT ORDER PROTECTION INTERPRETATION. ***$24,000 PAID ON
2/9/98, INVOICE NO. 98-MS-154***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS970055 AWC]hk
12/15/98: 4/23/97 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO. WAS FINED $3,000.00 BY THE
NASD FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(d) FOR ENTERING
QUOTATIONS IN A NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SYSTEM THAT EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS FOR
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS.***$3,000.OO PAID ON 5/30/97, INVOICE
#97-MS-418***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960147 AWC]hk
12/15/98: 7/15/96 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND
FINED $2,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART V, SECTION
2(d) OF SCHEDULE D TO THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT FIRM ENTERED
QUOTATIONS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS FOR THE MAXIMUM
2
ALLOWABLE SPREAD.***$2,000.00 PAID ON 8/1/96, INVOICE #96-MS-559***[NASD
COMPLAINT NO. CMS960040 AWC]hk
12/15/98: 6/19/95 NASD ARBITRATION
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; UNAUTHORIZED TRADING; SUITABILITY; CHURNING.
THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$380,493.50, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$124,000.00 JOINTLY AND
SEVERALLY; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$115,087.25,
AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$35,000.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD
ARBITRATION CASE NO. 95-02833]
12/15/98: 10/27/94 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC
CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): TRADING
DISPUTES-SELL OUTS. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT
ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$734.50, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$367.00; TREBLE
DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$1,469.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00
JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-,
AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER- JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED
BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$75.00. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE
NO. 94-01479]
12/15/98: 9/29/93 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): MISREPRESENTATION. THE
AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$3,746.50. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD
ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01857]
12/15/98: 8/03/93 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): OTHER; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY
DT. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$5,293.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD
ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01117]
3
12/15/98: 6/18/93 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY, INC. WAS FINED
$250.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT M.H. MEYERSON VIOLATED ARTICLE III,
SECTION 1 OF THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FOLLOWING
RESPONDENTS UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE
ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD.
***$250.00 PAID ON 7/16/93 INVOICE #93-MS-561***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS930012]
hk
12/15/98: 1/29/93 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS FINED $2,000.00
BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE
D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS.***$2,000.00 PAID
ON 2/11/93 INVOICE #93-MS-125***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS920105 AWC] hk
12/15/98: 12/02/92 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): MISREPRESENTATION; UNKNOWN
TYPE OF CONTROVERSY; UNKNOWN TYPE OF CONTROVERSY; UNKNOWN TYPE OF
CONTROVERSY. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$13,200.75; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY
CUSTOMER-$10,000.00; TREBLE DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$39,602.25.
RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO.
91-04073]
12/15/98: 7/21/92 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY, INC. WAS FINED
$1,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT M.H. MEYERSON VIOLATED PART VI,
SECTION 2(D) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS
SPREADS.***$1,000.00 PAID ON 8/6/92 INVOICE #92-MS-733*** [NASD COMPLAINT NO.
CMS920077 AWC]hk
12/15/98: 7/30/91 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
4
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; CENSURED AND FINED $8,545 FOR VIOLATIONS OF
ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 1 AND 27 OF THE RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE. WITHOUT
ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS: THE FIRM, ACTING THROUGH A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL FILED TO MAKE A BONA
FIDE PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION OF A COMMON STOCK IN CONNECTION WITH A PUBLIC
OFFERING; IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE BOARD OF GOVENORS' FREE-RIDING AND
WITHHOLDING INTERPRETATION, THE FIRM, ACTING THROUGH THE SAID INDIVIDUAL SOLD
SHARES OF A CERTAIN STOCK THAT TRADED AT A PREMIMUM IN THE IMMEDIATE AFTER
MARKET TO RESTRICTED PERSONS; AND FAILED TO ENFORCE ITS WRITTEN SUPERVISORY
PROCEDURES.***$8,545.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY PAID ON 8/20/91 INVOICE
#91-10-969***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. C10910108]hk
12/15/98: 3/28/90 NASD ARBITRATION
SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER
AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY. THE AWARD
INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$17,615.00;
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. 89-01474]
12/15/98: 10/12/89 NASD FINE
ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $2,500 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF
ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR
DENYING THE COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS: DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 20, 1989 THROUGH MARCH 1989, THE FIRM
EXECUTED FOURTEEN (14) SHORT SALE TRANSACTIONS FOR THE SAME CUSTOMER IN THE
SAME SECURITY WITHOUT MAKING THE AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION PRIOR TO EACH
TRANSACTION THAT THE STOCK COULD BE BORROWED AS REQUIRED BY THE BOARD OF
GOVERNORS' INTERPRETATION WITH RESPECT TO "PROMPT RECEIPT AND DELIVERY OF
SECURITIES".***$2,500.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY PAID ON 12/18/89 INVOICE
#89-MS-878***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-831-AWC]hk
12/15/98: 8/24/88 VIRGINIA ORDER OF INJUNCTION
THE FIRM ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DIVISION
OF SECURITIES AND RETAIL FRANCHISING, IN WHICH IT AGREED TO TENDER $2,000.00
TO THE COMMONWEALTH AND AGREED TO BE ENJOINED FROM ANY FURTHER VIOLATIONS. IT
ALSO AGREED TO MAKE AN OFFER OF RECISSION TO A VIRGINIA INVESTOR. THE FIRM
ENTERED INTO THE AGREEMENT WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE FOLLOWING
ALLEGATIONS: THE FIRM, THROUGH ONE OF ITS AGENTS, OFFERED AND SOLD SECURITIES
IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO SAID VIRGINIA INVESTOR WITHOUT THE
5
SECURITIES BEING REGISTERED UNDER THE VIRGINIA SECURITIES ACT, AND FAILED TO
DILIGENTLY SUPERVISE ITS AGENT. [DOCKET/CASE #SEC880063]
12/15/98: 1/07/85 MISSOURI SUSPENSION
CONSENT ORDER; THE FIRM'S BROKER/DEALER REGISTRATION WAS SUSPENDED AND THE
FIRM WAS PROHIBITED FROM ENGAGING IN THE OFFER, SALE OR PURCHASE OF SECURITIES
IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR COMMENCING ON 10/22/84 FOR
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE MISSOURI UNIFORM SECURITIES ACT SS 409.204(D) AND
(G). AT ANY TIME SUBSEQUENT TO 10/22/85, UPON PRESENTATION OF AN AFFADAVIT
STATING THAT THE COMPANY HAS NOT VIOLATED ANY TERM OF CONDITION OF THAT
AGREEMENT, THE BROKER-DEALER REGISTRATION OF THE COMPANY WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE
WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS TO THE FACTS ARISING OUT OF THE COMPLAINT FILED IN THE
ABOVE-STYLED CASE BEFORE THE MISSOURI ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING COMMISSION. THE
FIRM CONSENTED TO THE SANCTIONS WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE STATE'S
ALLEGATIONS.[MO DOCKET/CASE NO. NOT PROVIDED]hk
12/15/98: 2/15/84 SEC ORDER OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION
CONSENT ORDER; PERMANENTLY ENJOINED BY THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, BASED ON A CIVIL COMPLAINT FILED BY THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, FROM VIOLATIONS OF THE ANTIFRAUD
PROVISIONS OF THE SECURITIES LAWS, AND SECTION 17(A) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT. THE
FIRM ALSO AGREED TO TAKE SUBSTANTIAL STEPS TO ENSURE ALL PURCHASERS OF A
CERTAIN STOCK WERE MADE WHOLE. THE COURT FOUND THAT THE FIRM HAD ENTERED INTO
A SCHEME AND ARTIFICE TO DEFRAUD AND TO CONTROL AND MANIPULATE THE MARKET
PRICE OF THE STOCK OF A NEWLY FORMED COMPANY; DESTROYED RECORDS OF THE
BROKERAGE FIRM REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED FOR A PERIOD OF SIX YEARS UNDER THE
PRETEXT THAT A FIRE IN THE STORAGE FACILITY DESTROYED THE RECORDS WHEN IN FACT
MANY OF THE FIRM'S RECORDS WERE NOT DAMAGED BY WATER OR FIRE; AND AIDED AND
ABETTED VIOLATIONS OF THE ANTIFRAUD PROVISIONS BY OTHER DEFENDANTS IN THIS
ACTION. THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FINDINGS AND ORDER OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION
WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE COMMISSION'S ALLEGATIONS. [CIVIL ACTION NO.
78 Civ. 893 (MJL)]
12/15/98: 9/09/74 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED $500.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY
BY THE NASD. THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED ON 9/9/74 AND BECAME FINAL ON
9/9/74***FINES AND COSTS PAID 10/30/74*** [NASD COMPLAINT NO. AWC-173]hk
12/15/98: 9/20/73 NASD FINE
6
M.H. MERERSON AND COMPANY, INC. WAS THE SUBJECT OF A FINE BY THE NASD. [NASD
COMPLAINT NO. AWC-48]
12/15/98: 2/26/71 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY WAS CENSURED AND FINED $10,000.00 BY THE NASD. *****
ON 4/03/70, THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS CALLED COMPLAINT FOR REVIEW. THE DBCC
STAYED THE DECISION. THE BOARD OF GOVENORS DECISION 1/27/71 WHEREIN THE
FINDINGS MADE BY DBCC ARE AFFIRMED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF FREE-RIDING AND
WITHHOLDINGS VIOLATIONS, WHICH IS REVERSED AND THE PENALTY IMPOSED IS REDUCED.
M.H. MEYERSON IS CENSURED AND FINED $1,000.00.
**** COMPLAINT FINAL 2/26/71. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NY-1194]
12/15/98: 7/11/63 NASD CENSURE AND FINE
M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY WAS CENSURED AND FINED $900.00 BY THE NASD. ****
COMPLAINT APPEALED TO BOARD OF GOVERNORS ON 12/02/62. DBCC DECISION IS STAYED.
***** 7/11/63 B/G AFFIRMED FINDINGS OF DBCC. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NY-566]
7 |
