LottoNet—Vitale—Gray—Ponzi Scheme Allegations

California stockbroker fraud attorneyLottoNet Operating Corp., David Gray, and Joseph Vitale Allegedly Operated a “Ponzi-like” Scheme; LottoNet Investors were Told via Phone that Their Cash would Set up a Pompano Beach Business Involving the Electronic Sale of Lottery Tickets in Several States

LottoNet Operating Corp., David Gray, of Lighthouse Point, and Joseph Vitale, of Boca Raton, allegedly ran a “Ponzi-like” scheme wherein investors were purportedly told via phone that their cash would help implement a Pompano Beach Business which electronically sold lottery tickets in several states, according to an SEC Complaint currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities practice lawyers are investigating investment recovery options on behalf of investors in issues related to LottoNet, Gray, and Vitale’s alleged Ponzi scheme.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in activity related to LottoNet, Gray, and Vitale’s alleged Ponzi scheme are encouraged to contact attorneys Alan Rosca or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

LottoNet Operating Corp., David Gray, and Joseph Vitale allegedly misappropriated more than $2 million in a so-called boiler room scheme, the aforementioned Complaint notes. Said monies were allegedly spent on personal expenses including sales commissions, wedding expenditures and strip clubs, according to the Complaint.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating LottoNet, Gray, and Vitale’s alleged Ponzi scheme.

LottoNet Allegedly Raised Approximately $4.8 Million from Investors but Only Paid Out $10,500 in Investment Returns and Purportedly Used Funds from Later Investors to Pay Earlier Investors

LottoNet allegedly raised approximately $4.8 million from investors but only paid out about $10,500 in investment returns by using funds from newer investors to pay earlier investors, according to the aforementioned SEC Complaint presently being reviewed by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Said behavior is often a red flag and a telltale sign of a Ponzi scheme.

Gray, who formed LottoNet in May of 2015, ran day-to-day operations, and allegedly took $464,000 of investor funds, the Complaint notes.

Gray also allegedly stole another $121,000 to pay for personal expenses, the Complaint states.

Gray also allegedly solicited investor contributions for LottoNet by implementing a minimum of 13 unregistered sales agents, or so-called “boiler room”, to place cold calls to potential investors nationwide, according to the SEC Complaint.

Up to 35 percent of investor proceeds were allegedly paid out as commissions to so-called boiler room sales agents, the Complaint notes. Said agents have allegedly taken over $1.1 million from investor funds since 2015, the Complaint reports.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of investment fraud and are currently investigating LottoNet’s alleged Ponzi scheme. They take most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advance the case costs, and only get paid for their fees and costs out of money they recover for their clients.

Investors who believe they lost money as a result of LottoNet’s alleged Ponzi scheme may contact the securities lawyers at Peiffer Rosca Wolf, Alan Rosca or James Booker, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at 888-998-0520 or via e-mail at arosca@prwlegal.com or jbooker@prwlegal.com.

Alan Rosca (1163 Posts)

Alan is a securities lawyer. He also teaches Securities Regulation at the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. He focuses his legal practice on complex commercial and financial litigation and arbitration, particularly in the areas of securities and investment fraud. His office is in Cleveland, Ohio.


In our legal system, every person is innocent until and unless found guilty by a court of law or a tribunal. Whenever we reference “allegations” or charges that are “alleged,” such allegations or charges have not been proven, and are merely accusations, not findings of fault, as of the date of the blog. We do not have, nor do we undertake, a duty to continue to monitor or follow cases about which we report, and/or to publish subsequent blogs regarding various developments that may occur in such cases. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research regarding any such cases and any developments that may or may not have occurred in such cases.