|
|
|
Limits on class-action lawsuits at Supreme Court
Class Action |
2012/11/06 09:41
|
The Supreme Court appeared divided Monday in two cases in which businesses are trying to make it harder for customers or investors to band together to sue them.
The justices heard arguments in appeals from biotech company Amgen Inc. and cable provider Comcast Corp. that seek to shut down class-action lawsuits against the businesses.
Amgen is fighting securities fraud claims that misstatements about two of its drugs used to treat anemia artificially inflated its stock price. Comcast is facing a lawsuit from customers who say the company's monopoly in parts of the Philadelphia area allowed it to raise prices unfairly.
Last year, the Supreme Court raised the bar for some class-action suits when it sided with Wal-Mart against up to 1.6 million of its female employees who complained of sex discrimination. In the Wal-Mart case, the court said there were too many women in too many jobs at the nation's largest private employer to wrap into one lawsuit.
Class actions increase pressure on businesses to settle suits because of the cost of defending them and the potential for very large judgments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rosen Law Firm Announces Securities Class Action
Class Action |
2012/10/13 09:44
|
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. today announced that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased OCZ (OCZ) common stock or call options, or sold OCZ put options, between July 10, 2012 and October 10, 2012, inclusive (the "Class Period").
To join the OCZ class action, visit the firm's website at http://rosenlegal.com, or call Phillip Kim, Esq., toll-free, at 866-767-3653; you may also email pkim@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.
NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN ONE. YOU MAY CHOOSE TO DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT AND REMAIN AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER.
The Complaint asserts violations of the federal securities laws against OCZ and certain if its officers and directors for issuing misleading financial information. Namely, the lawsuit asserts that OCZ: (a) was providing extraordinary customer incentives in excess of what was normal and customary in the past; and (b) improperly accounting for customer incentive programs. As a result, OCZ's financial results were misstated during the Class Period and the OCZ lacked adequate internal controls. The Complaint alleges that when this adverse information entered the market investors lost nearly half the value of their investment.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than December 10, 2012. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. If you wish to join the litigation, or to discuss your rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact Phillip Kim, Esq. of The Rosen Law Firm, toll-free, at 866-767-3653, or via e-mail at pkim@rosenlegal.com.
www.rosenlegal.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action
Class Action |
2012/08/22 13:45
|
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP has filed a securities class action lawsuit against Monster Beverage Corporation and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, is on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Monster securities between February 23, 2012 and August 9, 2012, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). This securities class action seeks to recover damages caused by the Company's violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder against the Company and certain of its top officials.
If you are a shareholder who purchased Monster securities during the Class Period, you have until October 22, 2012 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.
The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York and Chicago, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 75 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of defrauded investors.
www.pomerantzlaw.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman agrees to settle mortgage debt class action
Class Action |
2012/07/20 11:23
|
Goldman Sachs Group Inc has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit with investors who claimed losses on $698 million of securities backed by risky mortgage loans issued by defunct subprime lender New Century Financial Corp.
Lawyers for the investors said in a letter filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Tuesday that a proposed settlement had been reached. Terms were not immediately disclosed, though they are expected to be included in court papers filed by July 31.
Goldman is one of many banks accused by U.S. legislators and regulators of fueling the nation's housing and financial crisis by misleading investors about the quality of mortgage debt they sold.
A federal judge in February ordered Goldman to face the class-action lawsuit that accuses it of defrauding investors in GSAMP Trust 2006-S2, a $698 million offering of certificates backed by second-lien home loans.
The loans were made by New Century, a subprime mortgage specialist that went bankrupt in 2007.
The investors, led by the Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi, contend the offering documents contained materially untrue statements about the underwriting and appraisal standards used by California-based New Century, the mortgage originator. Goldman securitized and issued the certificates. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class-action lawsuit filed against Mountain State
Class Action |
2012/07/18 15:23
|
Three students are suing Mountain State University, former President Charles Polk and the Board of Trustees over the school's revoked accreditation, saying it renders their degrees worthless.
Dale Burger and his two children, Amanda and Jeff Burger, are seeking class-action status for their case, filed late Wednesday in Kanawha County Circuit Court.
Some 3,000 students were enrolled as of April, the lawsuit says. But the plaintiffs contend that the class should cover anyone who enrolled since July 10, 2008. That's when the school first learned it might be in trouble.
The lawsuit says Mountain State told students it was in sound shape when it knew otherwise.
A spokesman declined comment on the lawsuit Thursday.
The private Beckley-based school has campuses in West Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
Mountain State is appealing the Higher Learning Commission's decision to withdraw general accreditation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2012/07/05 05:53
|
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the District Court of the Virgin Islands on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc. pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s Initial Public Offering, including all those who purchased Tibet stock after December 28, 2010.
Tibet focuses on the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and selling of modernized traditional Tibetan medicines in China. The Complaint asserts violations of the federal securities laws against Tibet, its officers and directors, and underwriters of the IPO for issuing allegedly inaccurate statements of material fact about the Company’s financial and business condition, which ultimately caused trading of Tibet’s stock to be halted and delisted by the NASDAQ, causing investors to lose nearly their entire investment. The Complaint alleges that defendants misrepresented and failed to disclose the Company’s material internal control deficiencies, which rendered the Registration Statement and Prospectus materially false and misleading.
No class has yet been certified in the above action. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. If you purchased Tibet common stock pursuant or traceable to the Company’s IPO and/or after December 28, 2010, you have certain rights, and have until July 25, 2012 to move for lead plaintiff status. To be a member of the class you need not take any action at this time, and you may retain counsel of your choice.
http://www.howardsmithlaw.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlement Announced In U.S. Bank Overdraft Fee Class Action
Class Action |
2012/07/02 10:59
|
U.S. Bank has agreed to pay $55 million to settle class action lawsuits that accused the bank of improperly manipulating its customers' debit card transactions in order to generate excess overdraft fee revenues. The lawsuits, part of multidistrict litigation involving more than 30 different banks entitled In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation, are pending before U.S. District Judge James Lawrence King in Miami.
The lawsuits claim that U.S. Bank's internal computer system re-sequenced the actual order of its customers' debit card and ATM transactions, by posting them in highest-to-lowest dollar amount rather than in the actual order in which they were initiated by customers and authorized by the bank. According to the lawsuits, U.S. Bank's practice resulted in its customers being charged substantially more in overdraft fees than if the debit card and ATM transactions had been posted in the order in which they were initiated and authorized.
"We are pleased to have achieved this result for U.S. Bank customers who were adversely affected by this anti-consumer practice," said Robert C. Gilbert, Plaintiffs' Coordinating Counsel, who oversees and manages this multidistrict litigation with Co-Lead Counsel Aaron S. Podhurst and Bruce S. Rogow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
