-------------------- BEGINNING OF PAGE #1 -------------------

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 14681 / October 5, 1995

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. D'ACQUISTO FINANCIAL GROUP,
INC., et al., Civil Action No. 95-1105H (AJB) (S.D. Cal. July 13,
1995)

The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced
that on September 20, 1995, the Honorable Marilyn L. Huff, United
States District Court Judge for the Southern District of
California ("Court"), entered its Order Granting Plaintiff's
Motion for Partial Summary Judgment against Defendants D'Acquisto
Financial Group, Inc. ("DFG"), Doubleday Trust ("Doubleday"),
John F. D'Acquisto ("D'Acquisto"), and Thomas F. Goodman
("Goodman"), all of San Diego.  The Commission's enforcement
action was filed on July 13, 1995.  

The Complaint alleged that from November 1993 through at least
June 1994, DFG, Doubleday, D'Acquisto and Goodman, an attorney,
engaged in fraudulent schemes involving the offer and sale of
securities in a prime bank investment program and an asset
enhancement program.  

The Court held that the Defendants committed securities fraud
when they obtained approximately $6.5 million from two investors
by offering and selling securities in their investment scheme. 
The Court found that defendants falsely represented to investors
that they were sophisticated money managers, that the investors'
funds were secure, the investment was low risk, and that the
investment principal and earnings would be returned to investors
on a timely basis.  The Defendants admitted they used investor
funds to purchase a contingent interest in a Mexican minor league
baseball team in a league which does not operate, vacant land in
Mexico and three racehorses.  

The Court further found that the defendants repeatedly violated
the law, showed disregard for the law, and represent a risk to
the public.  The Court permanently enjoined Defendants D'Acquisto
and Goodman from further violations of the antifraud provisions
of the federal securities laws.  The Court went on to write that
given the severe nature of the fraud perpetrated by the
Defendants, disgorgement is an appropriate remedy.  The Court
ordered the Commission to conduct discovery on the amount of ill-
gotten gains to be disgorged.  For further information, see Lit.
Rel. No. 14562.