U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
SEC Seal
Home | Previous Page
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 22565 / December 11, 2012

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dwight Flatt and David Della Sciucca, Jr., Civil Action No. 11-60920-CIV-Ungaro (S.D. Fla.)

COURT ENTERS FINAL JUDGMENTS ORDERING DWIGHT FLATT AND DAVID DELLA SCIUCCA, JR. TO PAY DISGORGEMENT, PREJUDGMENT INTEREST AND CIVIL PENALTIES

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on November 2, 2012 and November 5, 2012, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida entered final judgments against Defendants Dwight Flatt and David Della Sciucca, Jr., respectively. The final judgment against Flatt orders him to pay disgorgement in the amount of $2,207,885.96 representing ill-gotten gains received as a result of Flatt's violations of the federal securities laws, with prejudgment interest of $214,892.21. Flatt is also ordered to pay a civil penalty equal to his pecuniary gain of $2,207,885.96. The final judgment against Sciucca, orders him to pay disgorgement in the amount of $665,141.92 representing ill-gotten gains received as a result of Sciucca's violations of the federal securities laws, with prejudgment interest of $59,899.33. Sciucca is also ordered to pay a civil penalty equal to his pecuniary gain of $665,141.92. Previously, the Court entered judgments of permanent injunction and other relief, by consent, against Sciucca and Flatt.

The Commission commenced this action by filing its Complaint on April 29, 2011, against Sciucca, Flatt, Magnum d'Or Resources, Inc., and others. The Complaint alleges Magnum issued stock pursuant to false Form S-8 registration statements, and used bogus consultants, including Flatt and Sciucca, to funnel more than $7 million in illicit stock proceeds back into the company. In facilitating this kickback scheme, Magnum garnered the assistance of Flatt, Sciucca, and others, who liquidated Magnum S-8 stock, kept a portion of the sales proceeds, and then returned the remaining sales proceeds to Magnum under the guise of loan agreements

For additional information, see Litigation Release No. 21951 (April 29, 2011), and Release No. 22268 (February 24, 2012).

 

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2012/lr22565.htm


Modified: 12/11/2012