SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.

Litigation Release No. 17109 /August 28, 2001

   SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. LEWIS ALLEN RIVLIN, EDWIN EARL
   HULING III, AND ALFRED HUASCAR VELARDE, AS DEFENDANTS; AND Z-FINANCE,
   S.A., ANTHONY P. ZIOUDAS, HEDLEY FINANCE LTD., CHRISTIAN DANTE, AND
   CHRYSANTHOS CHRYSOSTOMOU, AS RELIEF DEFENDANTS, Civil Action No.
   99-1455 (RCL) (U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia)

               Court Orders Washington Attorney Lewis Rivlin
               To Pay Over $6.5 Million For Securities Fraud

   The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that on August
   23, 2001, the Honorable Royce C. Lamberth of the United States
   District Court for the District of Columbia found Washington D.C.
   attorney Lewis A. Rivlin liable for securities fraud and ordered him
   to pay over $6.5 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest.
   Based primarily on evidence adduced at a five day bench trial in
   October 2000, the Court found that Rivlin violated the federal
   securities laws in 1997-98 when he offered securities involving a
   non-existent high-yield bank debenture "trading program" to investors
   and sold $6.239 million of the worthless securities to four investor
   groups, including an Ecuadorian charity for underprivileged girls.

   According to Rivlin, the "trading program" was based on the ability of
   certain individuals, known as "commitment holders," to buy medium term
   notes or debentures from the top 25 European banks at a deep discount
   -- 70% of face value -- and then resell the instruments to major
   investment firms like Merrill Lynch at only a small discount, perhaps
   96% of face value, on some kind of secret trading market. The Court
   found, however, that Rivlin's "trading program" was "a complete scam,"
   and that none of the investor funds Rivlin obtained was ever used in
   any "trading program."

   The Court further found that "`trading programs' do not exist," that
   "it is simply ludicrous to think that any sophisticated financial
   institution would sell something worth $100 for $70," that "there is
   no secret secondary market," and that "trading programs" are "a
   variation on the `prime bank' schemes of the early 1990's, which have
   been the subject of numerous public advisories" by federal agencies
   including the SEC and the Federal Reserve Board.

   The Court noted that according to a credible and convincing expert
   witness from the Federal Reserve Board who testified at the trial,
   there are a number of hallmarks or characteristics of financial
   instrument fraud, including