SEC v. Chris Faulkner and others (Breitling Energy, 2016)

Settled

✓ 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-chris-faulkner-et-al-price-manipulation-2016) by email

In June 2016 the SEC sued Breitling Energy's Chris Faulkner and eleven others and companies over an oil and gas offering fraud and a marking-the-close scheme. A final consent judgment against Faulkner, filed October 23, 2018, orders $23.1 million in disgorgement and $1.9 million in interest, payable to a receiver; the other defendants were not checked.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

$23.1m

Prejudgment interest

$1.9m

Total relief

$25m

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

the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on June 24, 2016 as release LR-23582. The respondents named are Chris Faulkner, Parker Hallam, Michael Miller, Joseph Simo, Beth Handkins, Jeremy Wagers, Rick Hoover, Gilbert Steedley, Breitling Energy Corporation, Breitling Oil and Gas Corporation, Crude Energy LLC and Patriot Energy Inc. (8 individuals, 4 entities).

The complaint alleges false offering materials and misappropriation of at least $30 million by Faulkner, and that while perpetrating the fraud he placed end-of-day trades to mark the close of BECC stock. The manipulation is one part of a mainly offering-fraud case. This library tags the matter as price manipulation and marking the close.

Non-monetary relief recorded: conduct-based injunction.

The final judgment as to Christopher A. Faulkner, filed on October 23, 2018 in the Northern District of Texas, records that he consented without admitting or denying the allegations. It enjoins him from violating several antifraud, registration and reporting provisions, bars him from serving as an officer or director and from penny-stock offerings, and orders disgorgement of $23,095,707 plus prejudgment interest of $1,911,594 (total $25,007,301), to be paid to the court-appointed receiver for the estates of Faulkner, Breitling Oil & Gas and Breitling Energy. The copy read states no civil penalty. This outcome covers Faulkner only; the case named eleven other defendants, and this page has not checked how it ended for them. Checked on 2026-10-04.

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.

• Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Marking the close — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2016-06-24 Litigation release published
2. 2018-10-23 Final consent judgment as to Christopher A. Faulkner

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
• Final judgment as to Faulkner (Oct. 23, 2018)

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.