SLATER & Gordon has filed a follow-up case in its long-running shareholder class action against the Centro property group.

The latest class action is limited to a subset of investors who acquired Centro shares after PricewaterhouseCoopers, the company's former auditor, began working for the property group in the latter part of 2007.

The case filed yesterday was necessitated by a decision handed down last month by Federal Court judge Donnell Ryan, who ruled that every potential claimant in a class action must have a claim against every defendant in the case.

Advertisement: Story continues below Slater & Gordon and Maurice Blackburn are running parallel class actions on behalf of Centro investors in the Federal Court.

The cases are set down for a trial before Justice John Middleton, beginning on August 22 next year.

Justice Ryan was following a decision of 10 years ago when the Full Court was considering the position of plaintiffs in a class action brought against tobacco products manufacturer Philip Morris.

Although other Federal Court judges have challenged whether the all-on-all approach is correct, Justice Ryan's decision meant the entire list of Slater & Gordon's clients who are suing the Centro companies couldn't also sue PricewaterhouseCoopers.

That is because some of the Slater & Gordon clients bought their shares before PricewaterhouseCoopers became involved with Centro. Slater & Gordon has also signalled to the court that it may seek leave to amend its original statement of claim against the Centro companies so that it traverses a shorter period of alleged wrongdoing.

The current case covers the period from April 5, 2007, to February 28, 2008, but a future amendment is likely to bring the starting date to mid-July 2007.

Slater & Gordon's class action is being funded by Comprehensive Legal Funding; Maurice Blackburn's case is funded by IMF Ltd.

State attorneys sued two companies yesterday in a new round of litigation to recover money for what it says was a massive fraud scheme by pharmaceutical companies and others that cost the Medicaid program tens of millions of dollars.

The Circuit Court lawsuit was filed against McKesson Corp., wholesaler of the pharmaceutical prescription drugs, and First DataBank Inc., which compiles and publishes the drug prices.

The suit follows earlier litigation against 40 pharmaceutical giants and other drug manufacturing companies. The case ended last month with the state recovering more than $82 million from out-of-court settlements.

The state's share of the settlement is estimated to be between $30 million and $40 million.

Yesterday's suit alleges that the wholesaler and the drug-price company helped inflate the price of brand-name drugs that resulted in the state overpaying Medicaid providers.

The lawsuit did not disclose how much money it is seeking. Attorney General Mark Bennett said they believe it will be "substantial."

Like the first lawsuit, yesterday's action seeks not only money for the amount of alleged Medicaid overpayments, but also punitive damages and civil penalties and fines.

The state pointed out that cost of prescription drugs in the Medicaid program increased to $117 million in 2004 from $45 million in 1999.

McKesson officials could not be reached for comment. Denise Apcar, First DataBank marketing communications manager, said to her knowledge the firm had not been served with the suit and would not comment.

The state's lawsuit yesterday follows litigation involving similar allegations against McKesson and First DataBank on the mainland. McKesson agreed to pay $350 million in a class-action lawsuit in Massachusetts two years ago and $9 million to Connecticut's Medicaid program earlier this year.

The fate of the largest job bias lawsuit in the nation's history — a claim that Wal-Mart Stores Inc. shortchanged women in pay and promotions for many years — hinges on whether the Supreme Court will let the class-action case go to trial.

The court is likely to announce as soon as Monday whether it will hear the retail giant's appeal asserting that a single lawsuit cannot speak for more than 1.5 million employees.

Business lawyers and civil rights advocates are closely following the Wal-Mart case for its implications for class-action litigation.
"This may sound like just a technical, procedural issue, but because of the economics of it, class-action certification is often the most important issue to be decided," said Washington lawyer Roy T. Englert Jr.

If the high court permits the Wal-Mart case to proceed as a class action, it will put enormous pressure on the retailer to settle, he said. The plaintiffs have not specified the damages they would seek, but given the size of the class, it could mount into billions of dollars.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several large corporations have joined with Wal-Mart, the nation's largest employer, in urging the high court to hear the appeal and to restrict the use of class-action claims.

They argue that it is unfair to permit plaintiffs' lawyers to lump together many thousands of employees from stores spread across the country and to rely on statistics to prove illegal discrimination.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities firm headquartered in New York City, announces that a class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee on behalf of shareholders of Green Bankshares, Inc. ("Green Bankshares" or the "Company") /quotes/comstock/15*!grnb/quotes/nls/grnb (GRNB 2.56, -0.07, -2.66%) .

The complaint alleges that defendants knew or recklessly disregarded that their public statements concerning Green Bankshares' business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading. Specifically, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (i) that the Company was overvaluing the collateral of certain loans; (ii) that, as such, Green Bankshares was failing to timely take impairment charges to reduce the carrying values of certain loans to appropriate market values; (iii) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (iv) that, as a result, the Green Bankshares' financial results were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On October 20, 2010, Green Bankshares announced its financial results for the 2010 fiscal Q3 and disclosed that the Company's net charge-offs increased on a sequential basis from $4.9 million in the prior quarter to $36.5 million. Furthermore, Green Bankshares indicated that it had engaged a third-party loan reviewer, which contributed to the asset quality-impact reflected in its Q3 results. As a result of this news, shares of the Company declined more than 43% to close at $3.68 per share on October 21, 2010.

On November 9, 2010, Green Bankshares announced that in consultation with the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, the Company had given notice to the U.S. Treasury Department that Green Bankshares was suspending the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on the Company's Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, issued to the U.S. Treasury Department. Moreover, Green Bankshares disclosed that two large relationships totaling approximately $31.4 million had defaulted during Q3. On this news, shares of Green Bankshares declined more than 29.5% to close at $2.57 per share on November 10, 2010.

If you purchased Green Bankshares common stock between January 19, 2010 and November 19, 2010 and you have lost in excess of $100,000.00, please request more information now by clicking here: www.faruqilaw.com/GRNB

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP is a national law firm which represents investors and individuals in class action litigation. The firm is focused on providing exemplary legal services in complex litigation in the areas of securities, shareholder, antitrust and consumer litigation, through all phases of litigation. The firm has an experienced trial team which has achieved significant victories on behalf of the firm's clients.

If you purchased Green Bankshares common stock between January 19, 2010, and November 19, 2010 and wish to obtain additional information, please visit us at www.faruqilaw.com/GRNB or contact Juan E. Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at jmonteverde@faruqilaw.com or by telephone at (877) 247-4292 or (212) 983-9330.

Attorney Advertising. (C) 2010 Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We are happy to discuss your particular case.

A $450 million class action is being launched on behalf of National Australia Bank shareholders who lost money during the global financial crisis because of NAB's exposure to toxic debt.

Legal firm Maurice Blackburn will lodge the claim in a Victorian court tomorrow.

The firm says NAB had bought $1.2 billion in collateralised debt obligations (CDO) in 2006 which had a heavy exposure to the US sub-prime housing market.

It will allege that between early January and late July that year, NAB failed to properly disclose to shareholders all material information relating to its CDO exposure.