|
|
|
Harwood Feffer LLP Files Class Action
Firm News/New York |
2009/02/09 13:01
|
The law firm of Harwood Feffer LLP announces that it filed a new class action lawsuit on February 9, 2009 on behalf of purchasers of the American Depository Shares (ADSs) of Satyam Computer Services Ltd. (Satyam or the Company) (NYSE:SAY) during the period January 6, 2004 through January 6, 2009 (the Class Period). Shareholders may obtain a copy of the complaint by calling our offices or emailing us at the e-mail addresses listed below. The action is pending in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
The complaint alleges that the Company and its two top executives violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading financial statements. On January 7, 2009, the Company's Chairman B. Ramalinga Raju sent a letter to the Satyam Board of Directors and the Securities amp; Exchange Board of India admitting a multi-year fraud in which Satyam's financial accounts and disclosures were systematically falsified. According to the letter, Raju admitted to having inflated the amount of cash on the Company's balance sheet by nearly $1 billion, incurring liability of $253 million on funds arranged by him personally, and overstating Satyam's September 2008 quarterly revenues by 76% and profits by 97%. The Complaint also alleges that Satyam's auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers Pvt. Ltd., PricewaterhouseCooopers International Limited, and PricewaterhouseCoopers were active participants in the Company's fraud. As a result of this disclosure trading in the ADSs was halted, with an estimated indication of a loss being approximately 90% of its value.
If you bought stock from January 6, 2004 through January 6, 2009, no later than March 7, 2009, you may move the court to appoint you as lead plaintiff, a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members. The court must determine whether the class member's claim is typical of other members' claims, and whether the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to recover is not, however, affected by your decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff.
Harwood Feffer has taken a leading role in many important actions on behalf of defrauded shareholders and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars in those efforts. The Harwood Feffer website (www.hfesq.com) has more information about the firm. If you wish to discuss this action with us or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights and interests with regard to the case, please contact the following:
Robert I. Harwood, Esq. Craig Lowther Harwood Feffer LLP 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 (toll free) 877-935-7400 e-mail: rharwood@hfesq.com clowther@hfesq.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gibson Dunn Partner James Moloney to Speak at KC Event
Firm News |
2009/02/06 11:08
|
The Knowledge Congress, the leading producer of regulatory focused webinars announced today that James J. Moloney, Partner and Co-Chair, Securities Regulation and Corporate Governance, Gibson Dunn amp; Crutcher LLP will speak at the Knowledge Congress’ upcoming webinar entitled: “Smaller Reporting Company Regulatory Relief and Simplification: Best Practices Explored”. This 2-hour event is scheduled on February 24, 2009, Tuesday at 12:00 NN – 2:00 PM ET. (For further details of the event and an updated list of panelists, please visit: http://knowledgecongress.org/event_2008_SRC.html)
SEC recently finalized the amendment on the rules for Smaller Companies' reporting methods paving the way to a more simplified approach in complying with the new requirements. It also allows covered companies to choose between different disclosure categories. Moreover, a new definition of Smaller Reporting Company was issued; hence, expanded coverage is expected. This event will aim to further explain this amendment along with the issues surrounding its implementation. Small, as well as large scale companies are strongly encouraged to participate.
The Knowledge Congress is assembling a panel of distinguished professionals and key regulators to help the public understand this new and improved regulation. The speakers will share their expert opinions in a two-hour Live Webinar.
About James J. Moloney
James J. Moloney is a partner and Co-Chair of the firm's Securities Regulation and Corporate Governance Practice Group and is resident in the Orange County office of Gibson Dunn. He is also a member of the firm's Corporate Transactions Practice Group focusing primarily on securities, mergers and acquisitions, friendly and hostile tender offers, proxy contests, going-private transactions, and general corporate matters.
Mr. Moloney was with the Securities amp; Exchange Commission in Washington, D.C. for six years before joining Gibson Dunn in June 2000. He served his last three years at the Commission as Special Counsel in the Office of Mergers amp; Acquisitions in the Division of Corporation Finance. In addition to reviewing merger transactions, Mr. Moloney was the principal draftsman of Regulation M-A, a comprehensive set of rules relating to takeovers and shareholder communications, that was adopted by the Commission in October 1999.
Mr. Moloney advises a range of listed companies on reporting and other obligations under the securities laws, establishment of corporate compliance programs, and compliance with corporate governance standards under the securities laws and stock exchange rules. He has advised companies in connection with SEC and other U.S. regulatory investigations, and stock exchange proceedings, and works closely with partners in the firm’s Litigation Practice Group on securities-related lawsuits and investigations.
In the cross-border Mamp;A arena, Mr. Moloney has been involved in cross-border tender offers, exchange offers and going private transactions. He has advised bidders as well as targets, and major shareholders of targets, on the registration, disclosure and reporting obligations under the securities laws arising from such transactions.
About Gibson, Dunn amp; Crutcher LLP
Gibson, Dunn amp; Crutcher has over 1,000 lawyers in 15 offices located in major cities throughout the United States, Europe, the Middle East and Asia, including Los Angeles, New York, Washington, D.C., Orange County, San Francisco, Palo Alto, London, Paris, Munich, Brussels, Dubai, Singapore, Century City, Dallas and Denver. We are committed to providing the highest quality legal services to our clients in a personal, responsive manner.
Gibson Dunn is a recognized leader in representing companies ranging from start-up ventures to multinational corporations in all major industries, including manufacturing, consumer services, hospitality and leisure, and technology, as well as commercial and investment banks, start-up ventures, emerging growth businesses, partnerships, government entities and individuals. We have an extensive practice representing corporations of all sizes in their transactional and general corporate matters.
For more information about James J. Moloney and Gibson, Dunn amp; Crutcher LLP, please visit: www.gibsondunn.com
About The Knowledge Congress
The Knowledge Congress is an organization that produces webinars that examine regulatory changes across a variety of industries. “We bring together the world's leading authorities and industry participants through informative two-hour Live webinars to study the impact of changing regulations.”
To contact or to register for an event, please visit: www.knowledgecongress.org. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sidley Austin Receives Commitment to Justice Award
Law Firm News |
2009/02/05 09:29
|
Sidley Austin LLP is a proud recipient of a 2009 Commitment to Justice Award given by inMotion, Inc., a leading non-profit legal service provider that helps indigent and working poor women who need divorces, orders of protection and assistance with other family law matters, including spousal/child support, custody and visitation. The ceremony, on February 3, 2009, honored the lawyers of the Sidley Austin LLP Externship Program 2004-2009 with a special Legal Team Award.
We are deeply honored to receive this award from inMotion, said Joseph Armbrust, co-managing partner of Sidley's New York office. Sidley prides itself on its strong commitment to pro bono representation and involvement in the community and our partnership with inMotion has been extremely important to the firm.
Since 2004, the firm's New York office has sponsored an innovative full-time externship program with inMotion. The program is open to all Sidley associates who have an interest in family justice. Each Sidley extern works at inMotion's offices in New York City for a three- to four-month period on a rotating basis and receives extensive training from inMotion. The externs litigate family law and contested divorce cases for women throughout New York City in need of legal assistance, especially those with complicated and demanding cases.
Sidley has a long-standing relationship with inMotion and has taken many of its pro bono referrals, as well as serving as one of its corporate partners. In 2003, Sidley received a Commitment to Justice Award for the firm's commitment to the ideal of access to justice for all individuals.
Sidley has a long tradition of providing pro bono services to individuals and organizations in the U.S. and around the world. Sidley's Pro Bono Policy encourages all lawyers to devote time to pro bono legal matters, including assistance to the poor and to charitable, community and other organizations that serve people who are indigent and unable to afford legal representation. In 2007, over 1,000 Sidley lawyers devoted more than 110,000 hours to pro bono matters. In 2008, Sidley was named as one of four recipients of The National Law Journal's Pro Bono Awards, given in recognition of its Veterans Benefits Project. The firm was recognized by NLJ in 2007 for its firmwide Capital Litigation Project and political asylum program. Sidley was also one of five recipients of the American Bar Association's 2007 Pro Bono Publico Awards.
For more information regarding inMotion's Commitment to Justice Awards, please visit: http://www.inmotiononline.org/content/view/211/261/lang,en/
Sidley Austin LLP is one of the world's largest full-service law firms, with more than 1800 lawyers practicing in 16 U.S. and international cities, including Beijing, Brussels, Frankfurt, Geneva, Hong Kong, London, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney and Tokyo. Every year since 2003, Sidley has been named to Legal Business' Global Elite, its designation for the 18 firms that define the pinnacle of the legal profession. BTI, a Boston-based consulting and research firm, has named Sidley to their Client Service Hall of Fame as one of only two law firms to rank in the Client Service Top 10 for seven years in a row, and to the BTI Power Elite as one of only seven law firms demonstrating the best client relationships for the fourth consecutive year.
For purposes of the New York State Bar rules, this press release may be considered Attorney Advertising and the headquarters of the firm are Sidley Austin LLP 787 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10019, 212.839.5300 and Sidley Austin LLP One South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60603, 312.853.7000. Prior results described herein do not guarantee a similar outcome. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wolf Haldenstein Files Class Action Suit
Legal Focuses |
2009/02/03 09:39
|
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman amp; Herz LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against defendants Beacon Associates Management Corp. (Beacon Associates), Joel Danziger, Esq. (Danziger), Harris Markhoff, Esq. (Markhoff), Ivy Asset Management Corp. (Ivy Asset Management), the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (BONY), Friedberg Smith amp; Co., P.C. (Friedberg Smith) and John Does 1-100 (collectively, the Defendants), on behalf of all persons, other than Defendants, who invested in Beacon Associates LLC I (the Fund) from August 9, 2004 until the present (the Class Period), and derivatively on behalf of the nominal defendant, Beacon Associates LLC I, to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and common law claims, including breach of fiduciary duties.
The case name is styled Cacoulidis v. Beacon Associates Management Corp., et al., 09 civ. 00777. A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on the Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman amp; Herz LLP website at www.whafh.com.
The Complaint asserts that during the Class Period, unbeknownst to investors, Defendant Beacon Associates, the Managing Member of the Fund, concentrated more than half of the Fund's investment capital with entities managed by Bernard Madoff (Madoff) or Madoff-related entities. Investors who entrusted their savings to Beacon Associates suffered millions in damages as a result of Madoff's fraudulent scheme.
This Complaint alleges that Defendants failed to perform the necessary due diligence that they were being compensated to perform as investment advisors, managers and fiduciaries, and proximately caused millions of dollars in losses. Defendants either knew or should have known that the Fund's assets were employed as part of a massive Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Madoff. Defendants ignored numerous red flags, including the abnormally high and stable positive investment results reportedly achieved by Madoff regardless of market conditions; inconsistencies between Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, LLC's (BMIS) publicly available financial information concerning its assets and the purported amounts that Madoff managed for clients; and the fact that BMIS was audited by a small, obscure accounting firm.
Additionally, Defendants Beacon Associates, Danziger and Markhoff issued an Offering Memorandum that was false and misleading because it falsely stated that the Fund's assets would be invested in a number of investment vehicles, including a Large Cap Strategy adopted by Beacon Associates itself, when in reality, unbeknownst to investors, the vast majority of the assets in the Fund were invested in Madoff-controlled entities. The Offering Memorandum also falsely stated that Beacon Associates would monitor the Fund's performance as well as the performance of each third party manager of the Fund's assets, to ensure that they adhered to their stated investment objectives. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants Beacon Associates, Danziger, Markhoff, and Ivy Asset Management, with no or inadequate due diligence or oversight, abdicated their responsibilities and entrusted the Fund's assets to Madoff-run investment vehicles. Plaintiffs further allege that Defendant Friedberg Smith failed to conduct a proper audit of the Fund's financial statements. Finally, Plaintiffs allege aiding and abetting claims against Ivy Asset Management and BONY.
Plaintiffs have alleged claims on behalf of the Class for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, Rule 10b-5, as well as common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, gross negligence and mismanagement, unjust enrichment, and aiding and abetting claims. Plaintiffs are also suing derivatively on behalf of the Fund for breach of fiduciary duty, gross negligence and mismanagement, unjust enrichment, and aiding and abetting.
If you invested in Beacon Associates LLC I during the Class Period, you may request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff by April 3, 2009.
A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts 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. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as lead plaintiffs. Your ability to share in any recovery, however, is not affected by your decision on whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Wolf Haldenstein, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.
Wolf Haldenstein has extensive experience in the prosecution of securities class actions and derivative litigation in state and federal trial and appellate courts across the country. The firm has approximately 70 attorneys in various practice areas; and offices in Chicago, New York City, San Diego, and West Palm Beach. The reputation and expertise of this firm in shareholder and other class litigation has been repeatedly recognized by the courts, which have appointed it to major positions in complex securities multi-district and consolidated litigation. Please visit the Wolf Haldenstein website ( a href=http://www.whafh.comhttp://www.whafh.com/a) for more information about the firm. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wrongful Death Suit Filed Against Peanut Corp.
Court Watch |
2009/02/02 09:32
|
The sudden and unexpected death of a Minnesota woman who fell victim to a nationwide Salmonella Typhimurium outbreak has prompted a wrongful death lawsuit against Virginia-based Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) -- a maker of bulk peanut butter and peanut paste.
Fred Pritzker, founder and president of national food safety law firm Pritzker | Olsen, P.A., filed the complaint Monday in Hennepin County District Court in Minneapolis for the heirs and of Shirley Mae Almer, 72, of Perham, Minnesota: Jeffrey Almer as trustee of the heirs of Shirley Mae Almer v. Peanut Corporation of America, a Virginia business entity and King Nut Companies, an Ohio business entity.
King Nut Companies is an Ohio-based firm that allegedly distributed the contaminated peanut butter that came out of PCA's plant in Blakely, Georgia, according to the complaint.
According to the complaint, the product was delivered to a nursing home in Brainerd, Minnesota, where Mrs. Almer was temporarily residing.
The complaint alleges that her death on December 21 was a direct result of consuming peanut butter that contained the same genetic strain of Salmonella that has sickened more than 500 other people in 43 states. On January 13, the FDA announced that PCA initiated a recall that included the product that had been served to Mrs. Almer.
This is a very large and significant recall, Pritzker said. It points to a number of vulnerabilities in our food safety system that require legislation and funding to correct. Consumers should feel concerned and demand a significant overhaul.
The complaint alleges negligence on behalf of PCA and King Nut for failure to train and properly supervise peanut butter production workers and other employees; failure to safely produce, store and transport its products; failure to maintain sanitary conditions during and after production; failure to prevent cross-contamination and failure to properly test its products, as well as other acts of negligence.
The complaint also alleges that PCA and King Nut are negligent per se for failing to comply with Minn. Stat. Chapter 31 and 21 USC Sec. 331.
The complaint also makes a claim for damages under the doctrine of strict liability.
Pritzker said Mrs. Almer was the canary in a coal mine whose death helped lead health investigators to the plant in South Georgia. Now federal officials view the PCA plant as the outbreak's lone, known source.
According to the complaint, Mrs. Almer's children were notified January 6 that she died with a Salmonella infection. Days later, the Minnesota departments of health and agriculture traced the problem to a five-pound pail of King Nut creamy peanut butter that had been in use at the nursing home.
Pritzker said grieving family members were angered to learn that the peanut butter served to Mrs. Almer contained the same deadly pathogen associated with hundreds of Salmonella infections since mid-September.
Mrs. Almer, who grew up in New York Mills, Minnesota, still owned a bowling alley in Wadena. She had survived two bouts with cancer in recent years and was cancer free when she was sickened with Salmonella. Just before she became ill, family members were planning to take her out of the nursing home. Instead, she became so sick from the bacteria that she was taken to a hospital, where she died.
Pritzker | Olsen has considerable experience and a reputation for success in representing survivors of foodborne illnesses (including E. coli, Listeria, Salmonella and Shigella). The firm is involved in virtually every national outbreak and has collected large sums on behalf of people injured or killed by adulterated food. In addition, the firm is devoted to educating the public about food safety issues and advocating for badly needed food safety legislation and increased funding for the federal, state and local agencies charged with protecting our food and enforcing food safety laws.
Pritzker and members of his firm are frequent guests and commentators about food safety issues and have been interviewed by and profiled in a number of media sources including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and CNN. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
KBR Halliburton Accused in Class Action
Headline News |
2009/01/28 09:12
|
KBR, Kellogg Brown amp; Root and Halliburton knowingly exposed U.S. troops to water contaminated by sewage and made soldiers sick by burning toxic waste unsafely, a class action claims in Montgomery County Court. The class claims that when KBR found it was giving troops contaminated water, it told its water quality specialist to concern himself only with the health and safety of KBR personnel.
The class claims KBR earned $4.8 billion in Iraq in 2006 - 45% of the company's revenue that year - and that the defendants acted egregiously merely to make more money for themselves.
The complaint cites a 2008 report from the Defense Department's Inspector General that confirmed that KBR supplied unsafe water to U.S. troops. It cites a 2006 report from KBR itself that found KBR's failure to disinfect water caused an unknown population to be exposed to potentially harmful water for an undetermined period of time, and that the deficiencies of the camp where the event occurred is not exclusive to that camp, meaning that countrywide, all camps suffer to some extent from all or some of the deficiencies noted.
They claim KBR's report admitted that the company kept little or no documentation on its water safety, standards or procedures.
The complaint states: Former KBT employees and water quality specialist Ben Carter and Ken May told Halliburton Watch that KBR knowingly exposed troops and civilians to contaminated water from the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers. Ben Carter, a water quality specialist who worked for KBR at Junction city, testified that he tested water and found it was polluted with sewage and other contamination and that it was not being chlorinated. He then treated the tanks for the KBR employees and told company managers the military should be alerted so they could treat their tanks as well. Carter told the media that he was ordered by his KBR supervisor to concern himself only with the health and safety of KBR personnel. KBR was supposed to test the water three times daily to confirm safety but, according to Carter, such testing never occurred.
The class seeks medical monitoring and punitive damages for negligence, breach of duty, willful and wanton conduct, and other charges. They are represented by William O'Neil with Burke O'Neil of Washington, D.C. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
