|
|
|
Judge mulling $410M BofA overdraft settlement
Class Action |
2011/11/07 12:21
|
An attorney for Bank of America says 13.2 million customers may be eligible for a settlement in a lawsuit claiming the bank charged excessive overdraft fees.
The final tabulation came Monday as a Miami judge considers whether to finalize a $410 million settlement during a hearing to consider any objections or other issues related to the deal reached in May.
The class-action lawsuit contends the Charlotte, N.C.-based bank processed its debit card and check payments in a way that triggered more overdrafts and therefore more fees. Even though it agreed to the settlement, the bank insists the overdraft system was proper.
The lawsuit covers people with Bank of America debit cards between January 2001 and May 2011.
New bank regulations prohibit this type of debit card fee unless customers approve. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/11/07 12:19
|
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 Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of OmniVision Technologies, Inc. between August 27, 2010 and October 13, 2011, inclusive.
The Complaint charges that OmniVision and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws by concealing the loss of its exclusive contract with Apple. On August 25, 2011 OmniVision disclosed delays in the production of its new 8-megapixel product line. As a result, OmniVision would not be the exclusive producer of camera components for Apple's new iPhone 4S, released on October 14, 2011. In response to this news, OmniVision stock declined $7.55 per share, over 30%, to close at $17.27 on August 26, 2011. On October 14, 2011, when the iPhone 4S was released, experts examined the phone's camera and determined that Sony, not Omnivision, had supplied a key component. On this confirmation of the reduced role of the Company's components in the iPhone 4S, OmniVision stock fell $1.65 per share, or 9.3%, to close at $15.95 per share.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than December 27, 2011, 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/omnivision/, or contact Izard Nobel LLP toll-free: (800)797-5499, or by e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com. For more information about class action cases in general, please visit our website: www.izardnobel.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MF Global faces class-action suits after bankruptcy
Class Action |
2011/11/07 12:19
|
Two class-action lawsuits have been filed against bankrupt brokerage MF Global as customers struggle to recover funds from the first major US casualty of the European debt crisis.
On Saturday, Seattle-based Hagens Berman said it was "investigating whether the company used clients' money to offset losses the company had incurred in failed investments."
It filed a lawsuit in the name of investors who bought MF Global shares between May 20 and October 28 or who bought bonds issued in August.
The complaint charged that MF Global "made false and misleading statements to investors, including failing to disclose the company's reported internal control problems in segregating clients' funds."
Attorney Reed Kathrein said Friday's resignation of the company's chief executive Jon Corzine, whose activities in the last weeks of the failing firm have attracted regulator scrutiny, was "not an encouraging sign."
"As we continue our investigation, we hope to uncover whether the company mixed investors' and company money, and if Corzine himself played a part in that decision," he added in a statement.
Boston law firm Block & Leviton said Friday it had also filed a class-action lawsuit in New York federal court on behalf of MF Global clients over the same period.
It charged MF Global made "certain materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's internal financial controls and liquidity levels" through its "most senior" officers and directors.
Investors lost some $585 million in market capitalization in the week that preceded MF Global's bankruptcy filings alone, according to Block & Leviton. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/11/01 10:11
|
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 Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of HCA Holdings, Inc. pursuant or traceable to the Company's Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with its March 9, 2011 initial public offering ("IPO").
The Complaint charges that HCA, and certain of its officers, directors and underwriters violated federal securities laws. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that defendants omitted the following from the Registration Statement: (i) HCA improperly accounted for its prior business combinations in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, causing its financial results to be materially misstated; (ii) HCA failed to maintain effective internal controls concerning accounting for business combinations; and (iii) HCA failed to disclose known trends and uncertainties concerning its revenue growth rate.
On July 25, 2011, HCA announced disappointing second quarter 2011 results. On this news, HCA's stock fell $6.64 to close of $27.97. Then, on October 1, 2011, Barron's issued an article titled "Where Did the $15.8 Billion Go?", which claimed HCA improperly accounted for two major acquisitions as recapitalizations causing HCA to overstate reported earnings and avoid taking significant charges which would have negatively impacted earnings. On this news, HCA fell to $18.81 on October 3, 2011.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than December 27, 2011, 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/hca/, or contact Izard Nobel LLP toll-free: (800)797-5499, or by e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com. For more information about class action cases in general, please visit our website: www.izardnobel.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Labaton Sucharow LLP Files a Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/10/31 08:43
|
Labaton Sucharow LLP filed a class action lawsuit on October 26, 2011 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of purchasers of OmniVision Technologies, Inc. common stock between August 27, 2010 and October 13, 2011, inclusive (the "Class Period").
The action charges OmniVision and certain of its officers with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the Company's financial results were artificially inflated by virtue of the fact that the Company had concealed the loss of its exclusive contract with Apple Inc. ("Apple") to supply imaging sensors for Apple's celebrated iPhone.
OmniVision is a designer and manufacturer of image sensors that are used in digital cameras to convert optical images into electronic signals. OmniVision is one of the leading suppliers of complementary metal-oxide-semiconductors ("CMOS") sensors used in mobile telephones. The Complaint alleges that OmniVision failed to disclose that: (a) it had lost its lucrative, high-profile, and exclusive contract with Apple; (b) competition was eroding its "leadership position" in the smartphone industry; (c) delays in the development of its 8-megapixel product line were threatening its prospects; and (d) it lacked a reasonable basis for its statements about its bright prospects in the smartphone market.
On August 25, 2011, OmniVision announced its results for the fiscal first quarter of 2012 and provided guidance for the fiscal second quarter of 2012 that was well below analyst expectations. The Company also disclosed delays in the production of its new 8-megapixel product line. Based on the Company's disappointing guidance, analysts recognized that OmniVision would not be the exclusive producer of camera components for Apple's new, fifth generation iPhone--the iPhone 4S--set for release in the fall of 2011. As a result of these revelations, OmniVision's stock declined $7.55 per share, or 30.4 percent, to close at $17.27 per share on August 26, 2011 on extraordinary trading volume.
On October 14, 2011, the iPhone 4S became available for sale and for disassembly. Based on a logo stamped on the inside of the camera sensor, experts determined that Sony--and not OmniVision--had supplied the CMOS sensor for the iPhone 4S. In reaction to this news, OmniVision's stock fell $1.65 per share, or 9.3 percent, to close at $15.95 per share on October 14, 2011 on high trading volume.
On October 14, 2011, the iPhone 4S became available for sale and for disassembly. Based on a logo stamped on the inside of the camera sensor, experts determined that Sony--and not OmniVision--had supplied the CMOS sensor for the iPhone 4S. In reaction to this news, OmniVision's stock fell $1.65 per share, or 9.3 percent, to close at $15.95 per share on October 14, 2011 on high trading volume.
If you are a member of this Class you can view a copy of the complaint and join this class action online at http://www.labaton.com/en/cases/Newly-Filed-Cases.cfm.
Labaton Sucharow LLP, with offices in New York, New York and Wilmington, Delaware, is one of the country's premier law firms representing institutional investors in class action and complex securities litigation, as well as consumers and businesses in class actions seeking to recover damages for anticompetitive practices. The Firm has been a champion of investor and consumer rights for more than 45 years, seeking recovery of current losses and necessary governance reforms to protect investors and consumers. Labaton Sucharow has been recognized for its excellence by the courts and its peers. More information about Labaton Sucharow is available at www.labaton.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dyer & Berens LLP Files Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/10/26 09:43
|
Dyer & Berens LLP announced that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of AgFeed Industries, Inc. between March 16, 2009 and August 2, 2011, inclusive. AgFeed is engaged in the animal nutrition and commercial hog producing businesses in China and maintains its principal executive offices in Colorado.
What actions may I take at this time?
If you purchased or acquired shares during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff, you must request appointment by the court no later than December 19, 2011. A "lead plaintiff" works with counsel to direct the litigation and participates in important decisions, including the amount of compensation to accept in settlement of the class action. The lead plaintiffs here will be selected from among applicants claiming the largest loss from their investment in the Company during the Class Period.
What are the allegations in the complaint?
The complaint contains allegations that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business. Specifically, the defendants misrepresented and concealed from the investing public that, among other things: (i) AgFeed's formula-based analysis for determining accounts receivable and calculating reserves for doubtful accounts did not take into consideration the individual repayment abilities of its customers; (ii) the Company's accounts receivable were materially overvalued and its allowances for doubtful accounts were significantly under-reserved; and (iii) the Company exaggerated its market edge as the combination of overstated assets and understated expenses resulted in an illusion of heightened profitability and Company value. Based upon the foregoing, the complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
About Dyer & Berens LLP.
The plaintiffs are represented by Dyer & Berens LLP. The firm's extensive experience in securities litigation, particularly in cases brought under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, has contributed to the recovery of hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved investors. For more information about the firm, please visit www.dyerberens.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Firm Brower Piven Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2011/10/25 10:34
|
Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation announces that a class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Hewlett-Packard Co. during the period between November 22, 2010 and August 18, 2011, inclusive (the "Class Period”).
If you have suffered a net loss for all transactions in HP common stock during the Class Period, you may obtain additional information about this lawsuit and your ability to become a lead plaintiff by contacting Brower Piven at www.browerpiven.com, by email at hoffman@browerpiven.com, by calling 410/415-6616, or at Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation, 1925 Old Valley Road, Stevenson, Maryland 21153. Attorneys at Brower Piven have combined experience litigating securities and class action cases of over 60 years.
No class has yet been certified in the above action.
Members of the Class will be represented by the lead plaintiff and counsel chosen by the lead plaintiff. If you wish to choose counsel to represent you and the Class, you must apply to be appointed lead plaintiff no later than November 14, 2011 and be selected by the Court. The lead plaintiff will direct the litigation and participate in important decisions including whether to accept a settlement and how much of a settlement to accept for the Class in the action. The lead plaintiff will be selected from among applicants claiming the largest loss from investment in the Company during the Class Period. You are not required to have sold your shares to seek damages or to serve as a Lead Plaintiff.
The complaint accuses the defendants of violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of the Company’s failure to disclose during the Class Period, contrary to its disclosure that webOS was going to play an integral role in the Company’s strategy going forward, including running on HP’s new TouchPad tablet PC as well as on all of the Company’s PCs by 2012, that webOS, the TouchPad and the PC business were not central to HP’s business model and webOS would not be integrated across the Company’s entire product line, that TouchPad hardware was inefficient, limiting the degree of effectiveness of the webOS operating system, and that HP’s business model was not working because the Company was unable to leverage its extensive portfolio and scale of products and services in a strategically beneficial manner.
According to the complaint, after, on August 18, 2011, HP announced disappointing third quarter fiscal 2011 financial results and lowered guidance for fiscal year 2011, and after HP announced several major shifts in its long-term business model, including that it "will discontinue operations for webOS devices, specifically the TouchPad and webOS phones,” the value of HP shares declined significantly.
If you choose to retain counsel, you may retain Brower Piven without financial obligation or cost to you, or you may retain other counsel of your choice. You need take no action at this time to be a member of the class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
