|
|
|
Sanford Wittels & Heisler Files Employment Class Action
Class Action |
2012/01/12 09:33
|
Attorneys at Sanford Wittels & Heisler today filed a $100 million gender discrimination employment class action complaint against Quest Diagnostics, Inc. and AmeriPath, Inc., in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
The complaint details the systemic discriminatory treatment of female sales representatives company-wide by the self-proclaimed "world leader in diagnostic testing, information and services."
"Although Quest boasts about its dedication to delivering quality care down to the molecular level, the company falls woefully short of devoting similar attention to extending equal employment opportunities to its female sales reps," said David Sanford, the plaintiffs' lead attorney. "Quest has known or should have known that its business practices have an illegal disparate impact on women, employees with family responsibilities and pregnant employees. However, it has consistently failed to adopt measures to rectify this pervasive discrimination that its discriminatory policies, practices and procedures creates."
Indiana resident Erin Beery and Florida resident Heather Traeger, both of them current Quest employees in the AmeriPath division, filed the suit on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly-situated sales reps employed from February 17, 2010 to the present. Beery is an Executive Territory Manager in Quest's Anatomical Pathology Sales Division in Indianapolis; Traeger is Senior Executive Territory Manager in the Anatomical Pathology Sales Division in Bradenton.
The complaint details a wide range of discriminatory practices in the selection, promotion and advancement of sales reps at Quest Diagnostics and AmeriPath, including discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and caretaking responsibilities in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal statutes.
In addition, both of the named plaintiffs in the case have individual claims of disparate pay, differential treatment, gender hostility, the creation of a hostile work environment and retaliation in the workplace affecting them in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal statutes.
New Jersey based Quest is one of the largest companies in the U.S. It is currently ranked at 320 on the Fortune 500, reporting revenue of $7.4 billion and employing 42,000 workers in 2011.
About Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP
Sanford Wittels & Heisler is a law firm with offices in Washington, D.C., New York, and San Francisco that specializes in qui tam, employment discrimination, wage and hour, consumer and complex corporate class action litigation and has represented thousands of individuals in major class action cases in the United States.
http://www.nydclaw.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2012/01/09 10:00
|
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC announces that a class action has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District Court of New York on behalf of purchasers of Camelot Information Systems Inc. American Depositary Shares ("ADSs") between July 21, 2010 and August 17, 2011 (the "Class Period"), including those who acquired Camelot ADSs pursuant or traceable to the Company's false and misleading Registration Statements and Prospectuses issued in connection with its July 21, 2010 initial public offering and December 10, 2010 Secondary Offering.
No Class has yet been certified in the above action. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, to discuss this action, or have any questions, please contact either Peretz Bronstein or Eitan Kimelman of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484 or via email eitan@bgandg.com. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address and telephone number. March 5, 2012 is the deadline for investors to seek a lead plaintiff appointment.
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of both class and individual litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general corporate work, litigation and securities arbitration.
http://www.bgandg.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2012/01/03 23:44
|
The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the American Depositary Shares of Veolia Environnement S.A. between April 27, 2007 and August 4, 2011, inclusive.
The Complaint charges Veolia and certain of its officers and directors violated the federal securities laws. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that Veolia was materially overstating its financial results by engaging in improper accounting practices; (ii) Veolia lacked adequate internal controls; and (iii) Veolia failed to timely record an impairment charge for its Transport business in Morocco, Environmental Services businesses in Egypt, Marine Services business in the U.S., and for Southern Europe.
On August 4, 2011, Veolia announced its half year results, for the period ended June 30, 2011. The Company reported consolidated revenue of EUR 16,286.7 million and operating income of EUR 252.2 million, compared to EUR 1100.7 million in the prior year period, due to "non-recurring write-downs amounting to EUR 686M." Veolia stated that it would exit certain businesses and certain geographies, including its Transport business in Morocco, Environmental Services businesses in Egypt, Marine Services business in the U.S. and in Southern Europe. On this news, Veolia ADSs fell $4.66 per share.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than February 27, 2012, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class. A lead plaintiff is a class member that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Although your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision whether or not to seek appointment as a lead plaintiff, lead plaintiffs make important decisions which could affect the overall recovery for class members.
While Izard Nobel LLP has not filed a lawsuit against the defendants, to view a copy of the Complaint initiating the class action or for more information about the case, and your rights, visit: www.izardnobel.com/veolia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Files Securities Fraud Class Action
Class Action |
2011/12/29 09:48
|
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of IntraLinks Holdings, Inc. between February 17, 2011 and November 10, 2011, inclusive, alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The case is entitled Thaler v. IntraLinks Holdings, Inc., C.A. No. 11-CV-9528 (S.D.N.Y.). The Complaint names IntraLinks and certain of its officers and directors as defendants.
If you wish to view a copy of the Complaint, discuss this action, or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Noah R. Wortman, Case Development Director of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 919 North Market Street, Suite 980 Wilmington, Delaware, 19801 at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to info@rigrodskylong.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/news/intralinks-il.
IntraLinks, together with its subsidiaries, provides software-as-a-service (SaaS) solutions for securely managing content, exchanging critical business information, and collaborating within and among organizations worldwide.
The Complaint asserts that during the Class Period, defendants knew, or recklessly disregarded, that the positive statements concerning the Company’s business prospects, as well as the full year guidance provided by Defendants on February 17, 2011, were materially false and misleading because by end of the first quarter of 2011 a large Enterprise customer informed the Company that it was dramatically reducing its use of IntraLinks’ products going forward and that the Company would have to reducing its earnings expectations as a result. Despite their knowledge of the foregoing, however, defendants failed to disclose that their positive statements about the Company’s business prospects, or the financial guidance issued in February 2011, were no longer accurate in light of the reduced use of the Company’s products by the large Enterprise customer.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than February 4, 2012. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.
http://www.rigrodskylong.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Action Suit
Class Action |
2011/12/28 10:32
|
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of Veolia Environnement S.A. American Depositary Shares during the period between April 27, 2007 and August 4, 2011.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Samuel H. Rudman or David A. Rosenfeld of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at djr@rgrdlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/veolia/. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
The complaint charges Veolia and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Veolia operates utility and public transportation businesses. The Company supplies drinking water, provides waste management services, manages and maintains heating and air conditioning systems, and operates rail and road passenger transportation systems.
The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and prospects. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (a) that Veolia was materially overstating its financial results by engaging in improper accounting practices; (b) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls and was therefore unable to ascertain its true financial condition; (c) that Veolia failed to timely record an impairment charge for its Transport business in Morocco, Environmental Services businesses in Egypt, Marine Services business in the United States, and for Southern Europe; (d) that the Company’s revenues were being hampered by the renewal of some of its major concession contracts; and (e) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects.
Robbins Geller, a 180-lawyer firm with offices in San Diego, San Francisco, New York, Boca Raton, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia and Atlanta, is active in major litigations pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States and has taken a leading role in many important actions on behalf of defrauded investors, consumers, and companies, as well as victims of human rights violations.
http://www.rgrdlaw.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action
Class Action |
2011/12/27 16:25
|
Shareholders of Pain Therapeutics, Inc. are reminded of the securities class action lawsuit filed against PTIE and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in the United States District Court, Western District of Texas, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities who purchased PTIE securities during the period from February 3, 2011 through June 23, 2011.
If you are a shareholder who purchased PTIE securities during the Class Period, you have until January 31, 2012 to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff for the class. A copy of the complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Rachelle R. Boyle at rrboyle@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll free, x350. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address and telephone number.
The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, PTIE made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose material facts about a new drug, REMOXY. Specifically, PTIE failed to disclose that REMOXY was not approvable by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration due to chemistry, manufacturing, and control deficiencies that caused inconsistent results during laboratory tests.
www.pomerantzlaw.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP Has Filed a Class Action
Class Action |
2011/12/26 16:24
|
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of investors who purchased common stock of Keyuan Petrochemicals, Inc. between August 16, 2010 and October 7, 2011, inclusive alleging violations of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.
The complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws, Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, including allegations of issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market which had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of Keyuan’s common stock.
If you suffered a loss in Keyuan you have until January 17, 2012 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. To be a member of the class you need not take action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent class member. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this Notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Michael Goldberg, Esquire, of Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067, by telephone at (310) 201-9150, Toll Free at (888) 773-9224, by e-mail to shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.glancylaw.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
