SEC v. Robert Cortez Marshall and Adz on Wheelz (ponzi schemes, 2017)

Judgment entered

✓ 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-robert-cortez-marshall-ponzi-schemes-2017) by email

In August 2017 the SEC charged Las Vegas resident Robert Cortez Marshall with running a $5.7 million Ponzi scheme through Adz on Wheelz, which claimed to profit from advertisements displayed on cars. In June 2020 the Nevada federal court entered final judgment, after Marshall consented without admitting or denying the allegations, ordering disgorgement, interest and a penalty.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$1.5m

Disgorgement

$1.5m

Prejudgment interest

$286k

Total relief

$3.2m

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 complaint, filed August 15, 2017, alleged that about 200 investors were promised guaranteed weekly royalties totaling over 200 percent a year and a refund at any time, although the display monitors had technical problems and the company sold few advertisements, so earlier payments depended on later investors' money.

Outcome: Marshall consented to a judgment without admitting or denying the allegations and left the amounts for the court to decide. On June 8, 2020 the District of Nevada ordered him to disgorge $1,473,661, pay $286,103 in prejudgment interest and pay a civil penalty of $1,473,661, and overruled his objection to the magistrate judge's order. The judgment covers Marshall; it does not show what, if anything, was collected, and the Adz entity is not separately addressed in the order we read.

This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes because the document describes payments to earlier participants made from later participants' money. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2017-08-16 Litigation release published
2. 2020-06-08 District of Nevada enters final judgment setting disgorgement, interest and penalty

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
• Order and final judgment (D. Nev., June 8, 2020)

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.