|
|
|
Countrywide lawsuit seeks class action status
Class Action |
2007/08/21 05:36
|
Law firm Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP on Monday filed a lawsuit against mortgage lender Countrywide Financial Corp that seeks class action status. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of Countrywide common stock during the period between Jan. 31, 2006 and Aug. 9, 2007, the firm said in a statement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
AT&T Class Action Suit to Proceed
Class Action |
2007/08/20 09:59
|
A lawsuit alleging that AT&T's mobile phone customers received inferior service after the company's wireless division was sold to Cingular Wireless can proceed as a class action, a federal appeals court ruling, quoted by an Associated Press report said.
The Associated Press report said at issue was a clause in old Cingular contracts that forced customers to litigate their grievances independently, instead of grouping together for a class action lawsuit.
A three-judge panel in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the contract was a violation of California law.
The ruling is further condemnation of so-called "class action waivers," which other courts have ruled illegally shield companies engaged in potentially harmful conduct, the report said.
The court took a "clear position protecting consumers and their right to pursue class action relief," Bill Weinstein, one of the plaintiffs' lawyers, was quoted by the report as saying.
The case was filed as a national class action lawsuit in 2006 by Kennith Shroyer of Porterville, California, the report said.
Shroyer had switched his AT&T cell phone accounts to Cingular after Atlanta-based Cingular's $41 billion acquisition of AT&T Wireless Services in October 2004.
Shroyer claimed Cingular let AT&T's service deteriorate in a scheme to force AT&T customers to switch to Cingular under less favorable contract terms.
The US District Court for the Central District of California ordered the case into individual arbitration last year because of the class action waiver in Shroyer's contract, the report added.
The company said the ruling is based on language in an old contract, but didn't provide details as to how its new contracts differed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class-action lawsuit filed against Radian
Class Action |
2007/08/16 08:04
|
| A class-action shareholder lawsuit has been filed against Radian Group, the mortgage insurer whose endangered half-billion dollar stake in a subprime mortgage investor has sunk its stock price and put a planned merger with rival MGIC Investment Corp. in doubt. The U.S. District Court suit, filed in Philadelphia by San Francisco-based law firm Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins, is on behalf of investors who bought securities between Jan. 23 and July 31, the firm said late Wednesday. Among other things, the suit stated, Radian of Philadelphia failed to disclose that its $518 million investment in Credit-Based Asset Servicing and Securitization, known as C-BASS, was materially impaired and quickly declining in value, and that it overstated financial results by failing to write-down that investment in a timely fashion. Radian (NYSE:RDN) has said that the entirety of its investment in C-BASS may be lost. Since Radian issued a statement July 30 about the investment, its stock price has tumbled far below its pre-announcement price of about $40. It was trading down 3 percent Thursday at $16.14. MGIC (NYSE:MTG) of Milwaukee has said it is not obligated to go through with the merger but Radian has disputed that. The stock deal was originally valued at nearly $4.9 billion, but shares of both companies have lost more than half their value since it was announced Feb. 6. The deal called for an exchange of shares with Radian's stock valued at $60.78 per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class-action suit filed against Pall
Class Action |
2007/08/16 06:03
|
A Manhattan-based law firm has filed a class-action suit against Pall Corp., the manufacturer of high-tech filtration systems, which earlier this month said its financial statements dating to 1999 can no longer be relied upon and will have to be restated. Another law firm, in Hartford, Conn., Wednesday said it is seeking class-action status to file a suit against Pall, based in East Hills, and one of Long Island's largest employers.
The Manhattan law firm Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP filed the class-action suit late Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, charging Pall and certain of its officers and directors with issuing "materially false and misleading statements that misrepresented and failed to disclose" that the company was overstating its financial results by understating its tax liability.
Pat Iannucci, a Pall spokeswoman, said, "We intend to defend the action vigorously."
The class-action suit noted that Pall reported it could owe more than $130 million in taxes, exclusive of interest or penalties, and that its financial statements for the fiscal years 1999 through 2006 "should no longer be relied upon and that a restatement of some or all of those financial statements will be required."
Pall said after markets closed July 19 that the audit committee of its board of directors had begun an inquiry into possible material understatement of U.S. income tax payments, beginning with the fiscal year ended July 31, 1999.
Investors sent shares of Pall plummeting. The stock fell over 15 percent in unusually high volume, to $41.11. On Aug 2, Pall said that its financial statements for the fiscal years 1999 through 2006 should no longer be relied upon. Additionally, Pall said it could owe up to $130 million in back taxes. Shares fell another 3 percent, or $1.21, to $39.90.
Shares of Pall fell $1.17 yesterday, to close at $35.48. The stock is still up 6 percent this year.
The Hartford-based firm Schatz Nobel Izard P.C. said Wednesday it is seeking class-action status in regard to filing a suit against Pall, but that it has not yet filed any suit against the company.
The law firm said in an announcement that Pall has and certain of its officers and directors have "violated federal securities laws."
Pall manufacturers systems that filter impurities out of everything from beer to blood. It is Long Island's seventh-largest company, in terms of revenues, which last year were $2.2 billion.
The company has about 10,828 employees, including 750 on Long Island.
Pall has sold its headquarters building in East Hills to Lowes, the home improvement retailer. Lowes plans to lease the site back to Pall for two or three years while it seeks approval to build a store there. Pall ultimately plans to consolidate its operations at a smaller facility in Port Washington, which it intends to expand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against KAL
Class Action |
2007/08/14 10:59
|
| Korean Air Lines (KAL) was hit with a $300 million fine for price fixing on passenger flights by the U.S. Justice Department and faces a class action lawsuit by American consumers seeking damages, according to reports yesterday. The Seattle-based law firm Hagens Berman Sobol and Shapiro (HBSS) filed a class action lawsuit with the Seattle Federal District Court against KAL on August 8, 2007 on behalf of passengers claiming the airline illegally conspired with competitors to fix pricing for passenger and cargo flights. The named plaintiff, James Van Horn, filed the suit on behalf of himself and all others who purchased a ticket on Korean Air from January 1, 2000 until at least July 16, 2006, said HBBS. HBSS managing partner Steve Berman said that the Korean Air’s collusive activities could have affected numerous passengers in both Korea and the U.S., and that HBSS wants those customers to be rightfully reimbursed. KAL conceded that the airline company is facing a class action suit brought by American consumers and hinted that it will seek a legal response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Brauldi Law Firm Announces Class Action Suit
Class Action |
2007/08/13 10:22
|
| The Brualdi Law Firm announces that a securities class actionlawsuit has been commenced in the United States District Court for theNorthern District of Illinois on behalf of purchasers of Motorola, Inc.("Motorola") (NYSE:MOT) publicly traded securities during the periodbetween July 19, 2006 and January 4, 2007 (the "Class Period"). No class has yet been certified in the above action. Until aclass is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless youretain one. If you purchased Motorola common stock during the perioddescribed above, you have certain rights, and have until no later than60 days, in which to move for Lead Plaintiff status. Any member of thepurported class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff throughcounsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain anabsent class member. To be a member of the class you need not take any action atthis time, and you may retain counsel of your choice. If you wish todiscuss this action or have any questions concerning this Notice oryour rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contactTali Leger, Director of Shareholder Relations at The Brualdi Law Firm,29 Broadway, Suite 2400, New York, New York 10006, by telephone tollfree at (877) 495-1877 or (212) 952-0602, by email totleger@brualdilawfirm.com or visit our website athttp://www.brualdilawfirm.com/ The complaint charges Motorola and certain of its officers anddirectors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.Motorola builds, markets and sells products, services and applicationsthat make connections to people, information and entertainment throughbroadband, embedded systems and wireless networks. The complaint alleges that in the summer of 2006, Motorola'spoor financial performance had depressed its stock price to below $19per share. In order to artificially inflate the price of Motorolastock, defendants began a series of false and misleading statementsregarding the Company's business and prospects. Specifically,defendants repeatedly told investors to expect strong growth in salesand revenues. On October 17, 2006, defendants announced that Motorolahad failed to meet its revenue and sales projections. As a result ofthis announcement, Motorola's stock price declined over 7% in twotrading days. Then on January 4, 2007, defendants announced thatMotorola's fourth quarter 2006 results also failed to meetexpectations. This time, the Company's stock price declined almost 8%. CONTACT: The Brualdi Law Firm
Tali Leger, Director of Shareholder Relations
(877) 495-1877
(212) 952-0602
tleger@brualdilawfirm.com
http://www.brualdilawfirm.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cargill Settles Class-Action Suit
Class Action |
2007/08/08 06:45
|
Wichita, Kan.-based Cargill Meat Solutions has settled for $1.1 million a federal class-action lawsuit filed by Pennsylvania-based employees who claimed they weren't compensated for all the hours they worked.
The lawsuit, filed in March 2006 by seven workers at Cargill's meat processing plants in Wyalusing, Pa., and Hazleton, Pa., alleged that, beginning in March 2003, they weren't paid for time spent performing pre- and post-shift duties, including cleaning and sanitizing protective gear.
In August 2006, U.S. District Court Judge William Nealon certified the class-action complaint, joined by 4,100 former and current workers from the Hazleton plant and 2,300 from the Wyalusing facility.
The settlement, reached late last month, will pay those who opt in between $300 and $900, depending on their job and length of service. Their attorneys will receive nearly $330,000.
The judge's approval effectively dismisses the claims, and bars any employee who chooses to receive payment from suing Cargill with the same claims. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
