On June 5, 2026, the SEC charged an investment adviser and related entities with a multi-year fraud involving a pooled investment fund that raised about $4 million from 28 investors. The SEC alleged the defendant misappropriated and commingled funds, concealed losses exceeding $3.6 million, and diverted assets for personal use.

Affinity fraud is a form of financial fraud that relies on social connections and trust. It most often occurs within identifiable groups, such as religious, cultural, or ethnic communities, or social organizations, where members share common values, experiences, or identities. Rather than approaching targets as strangers, those promoting the scheme position themselves as insiders, using familiarity and perceived credibility to create comfort and reduce skepticism.

Financial abuse of seniors and other vulnerable adults is among the most damaging and the least visible forms of investor harm. It arises when age, illness, cognitive decline, or dependence on trusted professionals erodes an individual’s ability to evaluate advice or resist coercion, even while legal capacity nominally remains intact.

By: Jeffrey M. Haber Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Rule 10b‑5 promulgated thereunder prohibit trading securities on the basis of material nonpublic information through any deceptive device, scheme, or act. Insider trading liability arises under either the classical theory, where corporate insiders owe duties to shareholders, or the misappropriation theory, where those entrusted with confidential information owe duties to the inf

By: Jeffrey M. Haber On November 18, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) announced that, on October 16, 2025, it charged Joshua Wander (“Defendant A”), Steven Pasko (“Defendant B”), and two companies that they founded, co-managed, and controlled—777 Partners LLC and 600 Partners LLC—with defrauding investors while raising approximately $237 million. The Commission also charged Damien Alfalla (“Defendant C”), the companies’ former Chief Financi

By: Jeffrey M. Haber On September 25, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) announced (here) that it charged the co-founders of Retail Ecommerce Ventures LLC (“REV”), and REV’s Chief Operating Officer (collectively, “Defendants”), with conducting a series of fraudulent securities offerings, misusing investor funds, and making Ponzi-like payments to investors. According to the SEC’s complaint, REV’s primary business was purchasing distressed retail companies wi

In Finkelstein v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 2025 N.Y. Slip Op 32882(U) (Sup. Ct., July 30, 2025) (here), plaintiff alleged that he was underpaid on his investment in a residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) trust due to the improper exercise of termination rights by the trust’s servicers. The servicers argued that the governing agreement barred the action because it included a “no action” clause.

A Ponzi scheme is an investment scam that induces people to invest money in a business or investment vehicle with promises of high returns and minimal risk. Rather than earning profits through actual investments or legitimate business operations, the scheme functions by paying early investors with money contributed by new or repeat participants.

On June 26, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC”) announced (here) that it charged a Manchester, New Hampshire resident, a real estate investment coach and real estate investment coach, with defrauding investors through real estate investment schemes resulting in losses of at least $3 million.

Today, we examine an enforcement action brought by the SEC involving a Ponzi-like scheme that targeted retired senior citizens that the defendant met through his church community

The allure of guaranteed profits from sophisticated crypto asset and foreign exchange trading served as the underlying predicate for the claims asserted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) against Ramil Palafox (“Defendant”), the founder of Praetorian Group International Corporation (“PGI Global”), a now-defunct entity he controlled, in S.E.C. v. Palafox, Case 1:25-cv-00681 (E.D. Va. 2025). The case marks the first crypto enforcement action under the new Chairma

A Ponzi scheme is intended to give investors the false impression that their investment is profitable. In a Ponzi scheme, the fraudster/promoter pays early investors with money that the investor believes is the return on his/her/its investment. In actuality, the money used to pay the investor comes from the investor’s own principal investment dollars or the pooled investment dollars of subsequent investors.

By: Jeffrey M. Haber Pre-IPO investing involves buying a stake in a company before the company makes its initial public offering of securities. Many stock promoters invite potential investors to invest in a pre-IPO offering by providing an opportunity to make high returns in a start-up enterprise on the ground floor. While investing at the pre-IPO stage can be rewarding, it involves risk for investors, including the risk of complete loss – i.e., that the investor can lose his

By: Jeffrey M. Haber The Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) and implementing regulations promulgated by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) require that broker-dealers file a suspicious activity report (SAR”) with FinCEN to report a transaction (or a pattern of transactions of which the transaction is a part) conducted or attempted by, at, or through the broker-dealer involving or aggregating to at least $5,000 that the broker-dealer knows, su

By: Jeffrey M. Haber Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PSLRA), a mandatory stay of discovery is imposed “ n any private action arising under” the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) “during the pendency of any motion to dismiss.” 15 U.S.C. § 77z-1(b)(1). In Camelot Event Driven Fund v. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 05534 (1st Dept. Nov. 2, 2023) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department was asked to determine whether t

Following the stock market crash in 1929, Congress enacted the Securities Act of 1933 (the “1933 Act”) and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the “1934 Act”). Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver Cty. Emps. Ret. Fund , 138 S. Ct. 1061, 1066 (2018). The 1933 Act has two primary objectives: (1) to provide transparency in financial statements so investors can make informed decisions about securities being offered for public sale; and (2) to address misstatements and omissions in the secur

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the appeal of an investment banker barred from the securities industry in a case concerning the scope of investor protection laws. ( Here .) The high court will consider whether an individual who passed along false statements about a company’s financial condition can be found liable for engaging in securities fraud. In particular, the Court will consider whether the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) can circumvent the requiremen

On June 11, 2018, the United States Supreme Court held that the filing of a putative class action equitably tolls the limitations period for absent class members to file individual claims but does not toll the limitations period for the filing of a new class action involving the same or substantially the same claims. China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh , No. 17-432. ( Here .) Nearly 45 years ago, the Supreme Court decided American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah , 414 U.S. 538 (197

Since the summer of 2015, the Delaware Chancery Court has issued a series of rulings in which disclosure-only settlements in merger objection lawsuits have been rejected. Those rulings culminated with the decision by Chancellor Andre Bouchard in January 2016, in which he confirmed that parties submitting disclosure-only settlements to Chancery Court judges should expect enhanced scrutiny of such settlements. In In Re Trulia, Inc. Stockholder Litigation , 129 A.3d 884 (Del. C

Why Corporate Governance Matters Today, it is essential for directors and officers of public companies to have an understanding of corporate governance. Essentially, this involves adhering to state and federal rules and regulations, meeting fiduciary obligations and establishing and implementing internal controls. Ultimately, an attorney with experience in internal investigations and corporate governance can provide guidance on these critical responsibilities. Sarbanes-Oxley