Plaintiff Bureau of Securities appeals from an order of judgment entered by the trial court after a proof hearing. The Bureau filed a multi-count complaint alleging defendants violated the Uniform Securities Law, N.J.S.A. 49:3-47 to -89. Plaintiff sought various avenues of relief including: an injunction against defendant Kizito and his affiliated businesses from further violations of the Uniform Securities Law; restitution to investors; and disgorgement of profits. Plaintiff also sought statutory monetary penalties.
After an eight-day hearing, the trial court made findings and entered judgment, accompanied by an order and written statement of reasons. The trial court found Kizito and one of his affiliated businesses jointly and severally liable for violating the Uniform Securities Law. The trial court ordered restitution and imposed a statutory monetary penalty. Interpreting N.J.S.A. 49:3-69(a)(2), the trial court expressly declined to impose the remedy of disgorgement. The trial court determined instead that subsection (a)(2) should be interpreted to permit the remedy of restitution or disgorgement, but not both remedies on the same facts.
Plaintiff appealed, arguing that N.J.S.A. 49:3-69(a)(2) authorized both remedies in the same enforcement action. Applying well-settled principles of statutory interpretation to the Uniform Securities Law, the court held: the statutory remedy of disgorgement may be applied by a trial court in tandem with the statutory remedy of restitution under N.J.S.A. 49:3-69(a)(2).