Today's Date: Add To Favorites   
Class action suit filed against Armtec
Securities Class Action | 2011/06/20 04:19
A class-action lawsuit has been filed against infrastructure products maker Armtec Infrastructure Inc. alleging the company broke securities laws when it instituted a dividend, later to cancel it after it became unsupportable by earnings.

The suit filed in Ontario Superior Court on behalf of investors who bought shares between March 30 and June 8 alleges that Armtec should have known when it raised capital in the public market that it did not have sufficient earnings to pay dividends.

"Through this class action, we hope to determine precisely what the defendants knew about Armtec's financial results when Armtec raised more than $50 million from investors," lawyer Jay Strosberg of Sutts, Strosberg LLP said in a statement.

Armtec shares plummeted earlier this month after the Ontario-based announced a widening of its first-quarter loss and the planned suspension of the 40 cent per share dividend. The dropped 22 cents or six per cent to $3.43 in early trading Friday on the Toronto Stock Exchange.

Class action lawsuits must be certified by a judge in order to proceed. None of the allegations against Armtec have been proven in court.

In a statement issued late Friday, Armtec said it was "confident that there are no grounds for a lawsuit to succeed."

"If, however, this suit proceeds, Armtec will defend it vigorously based on, amongst other things, Armtec's disclosure of the risk factors associated with its business and to the payment of a dividend."

The Guelph-based company, which makes construction materials such as precast concrete and tubing, said business was hurt by an unusually late and wet spring across the country during the quarter and ended up with a payout significantly in excess of free cash flow.

The company said it had to meet certain terms in its credit facilities and meet earnings tests on senior notes to be permitted to pay dividends.




NY lawyers: Affair with boss led to inside trades
Securities Class Action | 2011/06/13 20:26
Lawyers for a woman blamed by an insider trading co-defendant for using pillow talk to get inside secrets faulted her boss on Monday, saying he bullied her during a 20-year affair to make her get illegal secrets for him.

The lawyers, seeking leniency for Danielle Chiesi, wrote in a submission to a federal judge in Manhattan that Chiesi was manipulated by her boss, Mark Kurland, for nearly two decades as he carried on the affair, which began when he was 40 years old and she was 22.

Chiesi, now 45, pleaded guilty in January to conspiracy and securities fraud charges, and her voice was heard frequently on audio tapes played last month at the trial of her friend Raj Rajaratnam, a one-time billionaire hedge fund founder awaiting sentencing in what prosecutors say is the biggest case ever to result from hedge fund insider trading. The conviction of three more defendants by a jury Monday means all of more than two dozen people arrested in the case have been convicted.

Chiesi's lawyers asked a judge to reject the government's request that Chiesi be sentenced to three to four years in prison, saying she is less culpable than Kurland, who already has been sentenced to two years and three months behind bars.





Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Announces Class Action
Securities Class Action | 2011/06/07 11:42

The law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP announces that class action lawsuits have been brought on behalf of all purchasers of the securities of Longtop Financial Technologies Limited (“Longtop” or the “Company”) (NYSE:LFT - News) on the New York Stock Exchange between October 25, 2007 and May 17, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”).

If you purchased Longtop securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than July 22, 2011. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Your share of any recovery in the actions will not be affected by your decision of whether to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. You may retain Lieff Cabraser, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the litigation.

Longtop shareholders who wish to learn more about the actions and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff may visit Lieff Cabraser’s website at http://www.lieffcabraser.com/securities-investor-fraud/case/473/longtop-financial-technologies-limited-securities-class-litigation or contact Sharon Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll free at (800) 541-7358.

Background on the Longtop Securities Class Litigation

The actions are brought against Longtop and certain of its officers and directors for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Longtop, headquartered in Beijing, China, designs, develops, and delivers software solutions and information technology services to the financial services industry in China.

The actions allege that during the Class Period, defendants misrepresented and omitted material information regarding Longtop’s financial condition and prospects. On April 26, 2011, Citron Research issued a report raising serious issues with Longtop’s reported financial results, accounting practices, and operations. In response to the report, the price of Longtop’s shares fell significantly, closing at $17.73 per share on April 27, 2011.

Following the publication of the Citron Research report, Longtop hosted a conference call with investors and analysts during which its senior management denied the allegations in the report. On May 9, 2011, Citron published a second report entitled “Longtop Financial (NYSE:LFT - News) Final Proof of Undisclosed Related Party Transactions.” In response to the report, the price of Longtop shares fell another $1.67 per share, or 8.3 percent, to close at $18.54 on May 9, 2011.

On May 17, 2011, NYSE Regulation, Inc. halted trading in Longtop shares pending an announcement by the Company. Two days later, on May 19, 2011, Longtop issued a press release stating that it would not announce its fourth quarter and fiscal year 2011 results on May 23, 2011 as previously scheduled.

On May 23, 2011, Longtop issued a press release announcing that its independent auditor, Deloitte Touch Tohmatsu CPA Ltd. (“DTT”), and its Chief Financial Officer, defendant Derek Palaschuk, had resigned. According to the release, Deloitte stated in its resignation letter that it was resigning “as the result of, among other things: (1) the recently identified falsity of the Company's financial records in relation to cash at bank and loan balances (and possibly in sales revenue); (2) the deliberate interference by certain members of Longtop management in DTT's audit process; and (3) the unlawful detention of DTT's audit files. DTT further stated that DTT was no longer able to rely on management's representations in relation to prior period financial reports, that continued reliance should no longer be placed on DTT's audit reports on the previous financial statements, and DTT declined to be associated with any of the Company's financial communications in 2010 and 2011.” In addition, Longtop revealed that the Securities and Exchange Commission had commenced an investigation regarding related matters.

About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility.

Since 2003, the National Law Journal has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the top plaintiffs’ law firms in the nation. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examined recent verdicts and settlements in addition to overall track records. Lieff Cabraser is one of only two plaintiffs’ law firms in the United States to receive this honor for the last eight consecutive years.

For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm’s representation of investors, please visit http://www.lieffcabraser.com.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.



RIM Says Investor Suit Is 'Without Merit'
Securities Class Action | 2011/05/30 13:40
Research In Motion Ltd., maker of the BlackBerry smartphone, said Friday that allegations that the company misled investors about its financial state are "without merit."

Lawyers for shareholders of the company filed a lawsuit this week in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking class action status. The suit claims that between Dec. 16, 2010 and April 28 RIM executives made false and misleading statements about the company's financial condition and business prospects. The suit, which was filed by Mary T. Stabile on behalf of anyone who bought the stock during that time frame, names RIM itself, Chief Financial Officer Brian Bidulka, and co-CEOs Jim Balsillie and Michael Lazaridis as defendants.

The suit is the latest in a string of negatives for RIM. The company's BlackBerry smartphones are known for their security and reliability as email devices, but haven't kept up with Apple Inc.'s iPhones or phones that use Google Inc.'s Android software when it comes to running third-party applications. In addition to its sales struggles, the company released its first tablet, the BlackBerry PlayBook, to mixed reviews in April and had to recall about 1,000 of the devices in May due to defective operating software that could have made it impossible for users to set up the device. Most of the gadgets were recalled before being purchased by consumers.

The suit alleges that RIM "failed to inform investors that its aging product line and inability to introduce new products to the market was negatively impacting the company's business and margins." It also argues that RIM knew that BlackBerry shipments would decline and inventory would rise because of problems such as product delays and "lackluster" launches.

RIM's stock dropped 11 percent on March 25 after the company issued a lower-than-expected forecast for its fiscal first quarter. And On April 28 the stock dropped 14 percent when RIM slashed that quarterly forecast, saying it had been selling fewer and cheaper smartphones than it anticipated. Between Dec. 16 and April 29, the stock fell 17.8 percent overall.



Scott+Scott LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Securities Class Action | 2011/02/25 09:12

Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against Oilsands Quest Inc. ("Oilsands Quest" or the "Company") (AMEX:BQI) and certain of the Company's officers in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The action for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock and other publicly-traded securities of Oilsands Quest between August 14, 2006 and July 14, 2009, inclusive (the "Class Period"), including Oilsands Quest's "Exchangeable Shares" offered as consideration for the minority interest in OQI Sask on August 14, 2006; Oilsands Quest's "units" first publicly offered on December 5, 2007 at $5.00 per unit; Oilsands Quest common stock shares publicly offered on December 5, 2007 on a flow-through basis at $6.11 ($6.17 CDN) per share; and Oilsands Quest's "units" first publicly offered on May 1, 2009 at $0.85 per unit.

If you purchased Oilsands Quest common stock or other Oilsands Quest securities during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in the action, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. Any member of the investor class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of its choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. If you wish to discuss this action or have questions concerning this notice or your rights, please contact Scott+Scott (800) 404-7770, (860) 537-5537 or visit the Scott+Scott website, http://www.scott-scott.com for more information. There is no cost or fee to you.

The complaint filed in the action charges that, during the Class Period, Oilsands Quest and certain of its officers and directors overstated the value of the Company's assets by more than $136 million in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Practices ("GAAP").

As alleged in the complaint, on August 14, 2006, Oilsands Quest acquired the minority interest in its operating subsidiary, OQI Sask, that the Company did not already own. The Complaint alleges that Oilsands Quest's Class Period financial reports and statements issued thereafter were false and misleading in that: (a) defendants failed to properly account for Oilsands Quest's acquisition of the minority interest of OQI Sask in August 2006, materially overstating the value of OQI Sask throughout the Class Period; (b) Oilsands Quest's financial statements overstated the value of the Company's interest in OQI Sask and were presented in violation of GAAP throughout the Class Period; and (c) contrary to defendants' Class Period assurances, the Company's internal controls were inadequate to prevent it from improperly inflating the value of its assets.



[PREV] [1] ..[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24].. [26] [NEXT]
All
Securities Class Action
Headline Legal News
Stock Market News
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Securities Lawyers
Securities Law Firm
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Legal Focuses
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Law Firm News
Investment Fraud Litigation
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Supreme Court rejects appeal..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
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 ..
Denying same-sex marriage is..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..
China’s top court, prosecut..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
Supreme Court casts doubt on..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Oregon Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer Eugene. Family Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
Post-Divorce Issues Attorney
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
   Legal Resource Links
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
 
 
 

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News 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. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo