Brian Keith Hardwick, 648 B.R. 175

Brian Keith Hardwick (Defendant) was CEO of Regal Energy; Allan G. Anderson invested in Regal joint ventures. Plaintiffs Andrew and Lori Anderson are co-trustees of Allan’s revocable trust.
Allan (and his estate) sued Hardwick in Collin County, Texas asserting only securities-related and fraud claims; the parties mediated and entered a signed settlement and an agreed judgment awarding Plaintiffs $3,252,399.68.
FINRA separately issued an enforcement decision finding material misrepresentations by Hardwick in connection with securities. There is no evidence the FINRA order was confirmed by a court.
Hardwick filed a Chapter 7 petition and listed the state-court award as a debt; Plaintiffs filed an adversary complaint seeking nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(19).
Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment to except the agreed judgment and/or FINRA award from discharge; the bankruptcy court granted summary judgment that the state-court agreed judgment is nondischargeable under § 523(a)(19) but held the FINRA order alone is insufficient.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the state-court agreed judgment is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(19)	Agreed judgment arises from state securities-law and fraud claims alleged in the complaint, so debt is nondischargeable.	Settlement/agreed judgment lacks an express admission of liability, so it cannot be found "for" securities violations or related fraud under § 523(a)(19).	Granted: agreed judgment is nondischargeable because the underlying suit alleged only securities/fraud claims and the defendant neither expressly denied liability nor pointed to any alternative basis for the judgment.
Whether the FINRA order, standing alone, makes debt nondischargeable under § 523(a)(19)	FINRA found securities violations and ordered relief, so the FINRA determination should render the debt nondischargeable.	FINRA is a self-regulatory organization, not a judicial or federal administrative tribunal; its order was not memorialized in a court or administrative order, so it cannot satisfy § 523(a)(19)(B)(i)/(iii).	Denied: FINRA order alone insufficient—must be confirmed or reduced to a judgment/order of a court or appropriate administrative tribunal to support nondischargeability.

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (establishing summary judgment standard)
Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279 (burden of proof for nondischargeability is preponderance of the evidence)
Wright v. Minardi, 536 B.R. 171 (explaining two-prong § 523(a)(19) analysis and that bankruptcy court need not relitigate liability once non‑bankruptcy tribunal made the determination)
Jenkins v. Jones, 600 B.R. 561 (applying Minardi two-step approach under § 523(a)(19))
D.L. Cromwell Inv’ts, Inc. v. NASD Regulation, Inc., 279 F.3d 155 (holding NASD/FINRA is not a government agency)
Brown v. Felsen, 442 U.S. 127 (bankruptcy courts may look behind settlements to determine the nature of the underlying debt)