Law Firm Planner - Legal News - Robbins Geller Rudman Dowd LLP Files Class Action
Law Firm News
Today's Date: Bookmark This Website
Robbins Geller Rudman Dowd LLP Files Class Action
Legal Focuses | 2011/10/14 09:26
Robbins Geller Rudman amp; 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 the common stock of Aeropostale, Inc. between February 3, 2011 and August 3, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”).

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/aeropostale/. 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 Aeropostale and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Aeropostale operates as a mall-based specialty retailer of casual apparel and accessories. It designs, markets, and sells merchandise principally targeting 14 to 17 year-old women and men.

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: (i) that Aeropostale was experiencing declining demand for its women’s fashion division, which makes up 70% of the Company’s sales; (ii) that Aeropostale was enduring pressure on its profit margins as a result of increasing inventory and higher discounts on its clothing; and (iii) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects.


[PREV] [1] ..[1931][1932][1933][1934][1935][1936][1937][1938][1939].. [2812] [NEXT]
All
Law Firm News
Headline News
Law Center
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Topics
Lawyer News
Legal Focuses
Opinions
Marketing
Politics
Firm News
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Court upholds mandatory pris..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
Supreme Court casts doubt on..
Donald Trump appeals $454 mi..


   Lawyer & Law Firm List
Indianapolis Personal Injury Law Firm
Indiana, IN Personal Injury Attorneys
www.williamspiatt.com
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Chicago Truck Drivers Lawyer
Chicago Workers' Comp Attorneys
www.krol-law.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
 
 
© Law Firm Planner. All rights reserved. - Legal News and Articles on Recent US Legal Developments.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Law Firm Planner Media as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Legal Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo