The US District Court for the Northern District of California recently dismissed with prejudice a securities fraud class action against Electronic
The Delaware Supreme Court recently held that the dismissal of a shareholder derivative suit by a California federal court had a preclusive effect on
The plaintiff, a former officer of Alfacell Corporation, a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the development of cancer therapies, brought an action against his former employer, alleging violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5.
Shareholders in three mutual funds issued by Morgan Keegan Select Fund, Inc. (the Funds) filed a state court class action alleging that the Funds’ officers, directors, and affiliates took unjustified risks in allocating the Funds’ assets and then concealed those risks from shareholders, causing the shareholders to retain their shares while the shares dropped in value.
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington imposed monetary sanctions on plaintiff Play Visions, Inc. and its counsel for failure to search for documents in a timely fashion, delayed and inadequate document production, false certification that the relevant records were maintained only in paper format, and for counsel's specific failure to adequately understand the client's document retention system or assist in production.
Plaintiff asserted a securities class action complaint against Nextwave Wireless Inc., as well as certain of its officers and directors.
Individual plaintiffs residing in Switzerland and France brought suit against four corporate defendants, as well as certain corporate officers thereof, for, among other things, violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.
The defendant company, a subprime lender and issuer of mortgage-backed securities, suffered significant declines in its stock price after it disclosed in February 2007 that its financial results and expectations for future earnings were far less than it had previously anticipated.
A District Court dismissed class action claims asserted under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Plaintiffs, holders of American depository receipts (ADRs) representing shares in defendant Sadia S.A., a Brazilian food processing company, brought a securities fraud action pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.