-------------------- BEGINNING OF PAGE #1 -------------------

         UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 14782 / January 16, 1996

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. DOUGLAS R. DAMON ET AL.,
(United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, Civil Action No. 95 C 7569, filed December 22, 1995)

     The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) today
announced the filing of a Complaint on December 22, 1995, in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, in Chicago, seeking an order of permanent injunction,
disgorgement and civil penalties against Douglas R. Damon
(Damon), Robert M. Davis (Davis) and Kenneth C. Kolovitz
(Kolovitz).  The Complaint alleges that Damon, Davis and Kolovitz
made misrepresentations and omissions to investors in order to
sell $6.6 million worth of unregistered securities in the form of
promissory notes, in violation of the Sections 5(a), 5(c) and
17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b), 15(a)(1)
and 15(c)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules
10b-5 and 15c1-2 thereunder.

     The Complaint alleges, among other things, that from 1989
through October 1990, Union Credit Corporation (UCC) issued the
promissory notes, which Damon, who controlled UCC, and Davis and
Kolovitz, who acted as salesmen for UCC, sold to investors.  The
notes were not registered as securities with the Commission.  The
Complaint further alleges that Damon, Davis and Kolovitz made
numerous misrepresentations and omissions to investors in the
sale of these notes, including that UCC would use investor funds
to purchase business machines, UCC would lease those machines to
various businesses, and investors would receive a return of their
principal and between 24% and 31% interest on that principal
amount, which was to be derived from the proceeds of the business
machine leases.  In fact, the Complaint alleges, Damon operated a
ponzi scheme, and did not purchase business machines with
investor monies.  Rather, it alleges that he used investor funds
to pay other investors, and for his personal purposes.