UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Release No. 36909 / February 29, 1996 Investment Advisers Act of 1940 Release No. 1555 / February 29, 1996 Admin. Proceeding File No. 3-8966 In the Matter of Quest Capital Strategies, Inc. and David Chen Yu The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that public administrative proceedings have been instituted pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") against Quest Capital Strategies, Inc. ("Quest"), a registered broker-dealer located in Laguna Hills, California, and pursuant to the Exchange Act and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 ("Advisers Act") against David Chen Yu ("Yu"), Quest's president. The Order alleges as follows: Quest and Yu failed reasonably to supervise a former Quest registered representative, John T. Nakoski ("Nakoski"), with a view to preventing Nakoski's violations of the federal securities laws. From December 1991 to August 1993, Nakoski, while a Quest registered representative and the branch manager of Quest's Kingston, New York branch office, defrauded approximately thirty- five investors of approximately $450,000 by means of a "Fixed Income Loan Agreement" (the "Note"), pursuant to which he guaranteed principal and interest on investments in or through his investment business. Among other things, Nakoski misrepresented the safety of the Notes and the use of investors' monies. In fact, Nakoski used investors' money to invest in futures and futures options and for personal and business expenses. Nakoski incurred substantial losses on his futures trading, losses which he failed to disclose and which ultimately resulted in his inability to pay investors their guaranteed principal and interest. Nakoski violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Sections 203(a) and 206 (1), (2), and (4) of the Advisers Act, and Rules 206(4)-2 and 206(4)-4 thereunder. A hearing will be scheduled to determine whether the allegations against Quest and Yu are true, and, if so, what remedial action, if any, is appropriate.