SEC v. Chalmers and Julianne (ponzi schemes, 2014)

Dismissed

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 4, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sec-chalmers-ponzi-schemes-2014) by email

In April 2014 the SEC instituted administrative proceedings against Julianne Chalmers, alleging she sold unregistered promissory notes in a gold-futures scheme while acting as an unregistered broker. On July 14, 2015 the proceeding was discontinued because the Division could not locate her to serve her; no findings or sanctions resulted.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

On April 17, 2014 the SEC instituted proceedings against Julianne Chalmers under Exchange Act Section 15(b), based on a civil complaint. The complaint alleged that from 2011 she solicited investors for promissory notes purporting to finance gold futures on credit, through e-mail and newspaper advertisements, sold unregistered securities and acted as an unregistered broker for about $90,000 in commissions. The order states allegations only. The record previously showed her as two defendants, 'Chalmers' and 'Julianne'.

This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes and unregistered distributions, based on the conduct the document describes. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

Outcome. The Chief Administrative Law Judge's Order Discontinuing Proceeding of July 14, 2015 grants the Division of Enforcement's motion, which says that after several unsuccessful attempts to serve Chalmers it could not find her. The order states the proceeding cannot go forward and cancels the scheduled prehearing conference. The Division's motion was for discontinuance without prejudice, so this is not an adjudication of the allegations. The status here is recorded as dismissed for that reason; no finding was made and no sanction imposed.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 2 techniques in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Ponzi schemes — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Unregistered distributions — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2014-04-17 Administrative proceeding instituted (administrative)
2. 2015-07-14 Order discontinuing the proceeding (respondent could not be located)

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEC order
• SEC order discontinuing proceeding (AP-2928)

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.