Court Opinion

ID: 9694370
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 17:39:17.300898+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:00.441104
License: Public Domain

Passman, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I am in agreement with so much of the opinion of the Court that deals with the facts concerning the charge against May*100flower Securities that its agent Alan Robert Levine engaged in New Jersey securities transactions while unregistered. This infraction clearly was not willful nor injurious to the public interest.
The majority has remanded to the Bureau the matter of sanctions. However, it is indicated that said sanction “could validly be a reprimand together with payment of the registration fees” for the several years involved. If the Bureau has implicit authority to impose such a lesser sanction as censure or reprimand, then certainly this Court can do likewise.
As to the record-keeping violation, assuming all the facts as developed by the Bureau, the maximum penalty should also be a reprimand. This probability is envisioned by the majority.
Accordingly, I see no need to continue this matter which has now been in the Bureau and the Court for some time. We have jurisdiction for a final disposition. We can impose a. penalty. Both charges call for a reprimand and nothing more.
For reversal and remandmenl—Justices Hall, Sullivan and Clifford and Judges Conford and Collester—5.
For reversal—Justice Pashman—1.