SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Rel. No. 42772 / May 11, 2000
Admin. Proc. File No. 3-9649
_________________________________________________________________
In the Matter of the Application of
JEFFREY AINLEY HAYDEN
For Review of Disciplinary Action Taken by the
NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC.
_________________________________________________________________
OPINION OF THE COMMISSION
NATIONAL SECURITIES EXCHANGE -- REVIEW OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
National securities exchange found that associated person of member
made unsuitable investment recommendations to customers, made
material misrepresentations and omissions about the investments
and returns from those investments, and made or caused omissions
and inaccuracies in customer account documents. Held, proceeding
set aside because length of time between the violative conduct and
the initiation of the disciplinary proceeding violated fundamental
principles of fairness.
APPEARANCES
Peter J. Anderson and Sarah B. Estes, of Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan,
LLP, for Jeffrey Ainley Hayden.
David P. Doherty, Regina C. Mysliwiec, Susan Light, and Michael
Krevor, for the New York Stock Exchange, Inc.
Appeal filed July 8, 1998
Last brief filed November 9, 1998
I.
Jeffrey Ainley Hayden ("Hayden"), a former registered representative
with Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. ("Dean Witter"), a member firm of the
New York Stock Exchange, Inc. ("NYSE" or "Exchange"), appeals from the
Exchange's disciplinary actionagainst him. The Exchange Hearing Panel
("Hearing Panel") found that between 1982 and 1990 Hayden recommended
SNIPPETS:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
OPINION OF THE COMMISSION NATIONAL SECURITIES EXCHANGE -- REVIEW OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
National securities exchange found that associated person of member made unsuitable
proceeding set aside because length of time between the violative conduct and the initiation
David P. Doherty, Regina C. Mysliwiec, Susan Light, and Michael Krevor, for the New York
Jeffrey Ainley Hayden, a former registered representative with Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., a
The Exchange Hearing Panel found that between 1982 and 1990 Hayden recommended and purchased
The Hearing Panel also found that forms for these customers' accounts contained inaccurate
Rule 476and that he violated Rules 17a-3 and 17a-4 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Hayden now appeals that decision.
Hayden does not dispute the findings of violations made by the Exchange or argue that the
He argues only that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2642 and the Due Process Clause of the
We view Hayden's appeal as a challenge to the viability of the Exchange's disciplinary
Disciplinary proceedings against members of an exchange and their associated persons are
This section provides that, in reviewing an SRO proceeding, we shall determine whether the
Without further inquiry, we cannot find, as a factual matter, that Hayden's ability to mount
|
