SEC v. Benjamin Kirkland (insider trading, 2020)
Settled
Checked against the primary document on October 3, 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.
In March 2020 the SEC settled administrative cease-and-desist proceedings with Benjamin Kirkland over sales of Roadrunner Transportation stock while he held nonpublic information that its accounts were overstated. He agreed to pay disgorgement of $23,140, interest of $2,803 and a penalty of $23,140.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 34-88498 |
| Date filed | 2020-03-27 |
| Date resolved | 2020-03-27 |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | equities |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Benjamin Kirkland |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 |
| Techniques | Insider trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $23.1k
- Disgorgement
- $23.1k
- Prejudgment interest
- $2.8k
- Total relief
- $49.1k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted and settled the proceeding on March 27, 2020 (release 34-88498, file 3-19738).
The order finds Kirkland sold 8,000 Roadrunner shares while aware of material nonpublic information about balance-sheet accounts that were materially overstated, after executives had manipulated the company's reported results from about 2013 to January 2017. He neither admitted nor denied the findings.
Beyond the cease-and-desist order, the order requires disgorgement, prejudgment interest and an equal civil penalty. The earlier record omitted the interest.
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.
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
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-09-04 | Insider Trading | $109k | settled |
| CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-08-28 | Insider Trading | $65k | judgment |
| SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEBI v. Arun Kumar Somani and others (insider trading review, Indian Oil Corporation, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-08-13 | Insider Trading | — | dismissed |
| SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-11 | Insider Trading | $18.7k | settled |