SEC v. Anthony Marsico and others (insider trading, 2025)

Alleged — pending

These are allegations. SEC has filed an action; nothing in it has been proven, and the respondents have not been found liable. Everything described on this page is what the regulator alleges, not what a court has found. See our editorial policy.

✓ 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-anthony-marsico-insider-trading-2025) by email

In February 2025 the SEC announced charges against Verano executive Anthony Marsico and Arthur Pizzello, Robert Quattrocchi and Timothy Carey over trading in Goodness Growth Holdings ahead of the February 1, 2022 announcement of its acquisition. Pizzello and Quattrocchi consented to judgments on September 10, 2025; the SEC pages we checked show no outcome yet for Marsico or Carey.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

$823k

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

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on February 10, 2025 as release LR-26243, filing in the Northern District of Illinois on January 16, 2025.

The complaint alleges that Marsico learned of the planned acquisition through his job and tipped Pizzello, who tipped the other two. Goodness Growth's stock rose nearly 42 percent on announcement. The complaint asked for injunctions, disgorgement, interest, penalties and an officer and director bar against Marsico. The recorded gain is the sum of the four stated figures.

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.

Partial outcome. SEC litigation release LR-26408 (September 23, 2025) reports that on September 10, 2025 the court entered consent judgments against two of the four defendants, Arthur Pizzello Jr. and Robert Quattrocchi. Both are enjoined from violating Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. Pizzello owes disgorgement of $124,456, interest of $26,933 and a penalty of $124,456; Quattrocchi owes disgorgement of $28,136, interest of $6,002 and a penalty of $28,136. The release says nothing about the claims against Anthony Marsico or Timothy Carey, so the matter stays recorded as filed, and no amounts are stored in the structured fields because the lead defendant's claims are not shown to be resolved. We checked on 2026-10-04 and found no outcome for Marsico or Carey on the SEC litigation-release pages.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique 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.

• Insider trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2025-02-10 Litigation release published
2. 2025-09-10 Consent judgments entered against Arthur Pizzello Jr. and Robert Quattrocchi (reported in LR-26408)

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 litigation release
• SEC litigation release LR-26408 (Pizzello and Quattrocchi judgments)

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.

Same matter

The library links these 2 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

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

Record added September 10, 2026. If this matter has since resolved, been withdrawn or been dismissed, we want to know: submit a correction.