Securities Class Actions

Select an area:

Derivative Cases

  • Sovereign Bancorp

    This is both a stockholders’ class action on behalf of the stockholders of Sovereign Bancorp, Inc. and a derivative action on behalf of Sovereign.  The action is brought to enjoin the proposed buyout by Sovereign’s controlling shareholder, Banco Santander, S.A. of the shares of Sovereign’s common stock it does not already own, pursuant to a […](more)

  • Boykin’s Lodging Co. Derivative Litigation

    This class action and shareholder derivative action is based upon a proposed merger agreement between the Company and Braveheart Holdings, LP, (“Braveheart”). The transaction is valued at approximately $416 million, including the assumption of debt. Each holder of the Company’s common stock will receive $11 per share and each holder of the Company’s preferred stock […](more)

  • TXU Derivative Litigation

    Plaintiffs bring this action for breach of fiduciary duty derivatively on behalf and for the benefit of nominal defendant TXU against the individual defendants, who are directors and senior officers of the Company as well as third-parties with whom they conspired or who aided and abetted their breaches of fiduciary duty. This action arises out […](more)

  • Pallas v. Lucent Technologies

    United States District Court for the District of New Jersey The Firm is co-lead counsel in this stockholder derivative suit brought on behalf of the current holders of Lucent Technologies, Inc. (NYSE:LU) securities. The stockholder derivative suit alleged, among other things, that certain officers and directors of Lucent had caused the company to engage in […](more)

  • Vacek, Jr. v. Walter Investment Management Corp.

    This case is a shareholder derivative action on behalf of Walter Investments against certain officers and directors who breached their fiduciary duties and were unjustly enriched between May 3, 2016 and June 22, 2017.  Walter Investments is an independent servicer and originator of mortgage loans and servicer of reverse mortgage loans. After submitting false claims […](more)

Stock Fraud

  • Industrial Enterprises of America

    Defendant Industrial Enterprises of America is an automotive aftermarket supplier founded in 1974. Their products range from basics like anti-freeze and motor oil, to charcoal fluids and packaged refrigerants used in the automotive and dusting markets. The suit brought against IEA stems from both a blatant disregard for basic accounting principles and an overall scheme […](more)

  • RAIT Financial

    The above class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of all purchasers of the publicly traded common stock (NYSE: RAS – News) and all purchasers of the publicly issued Series A, B and C Preferred Shares of RAIT Financial Trust (“RAIT”) beginning on or about June 8, 2006 and thereafter, inclusive (the “Class Period”). The suit names […](more)

  • Sunterra Corporation

    Sunterra Corporation United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida The Firm is co-lead counsel for plaintiffs and the proposed class in this securities class action. The suit alleges, among other things, that certain of the former officers and directors of Sunterra caused the company to issue materially misleading financial reports and earnings […](more)

  • Sykes Enterprises

    United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida The Firm was co-counsel in this securities class action. The suit alleged, among other things, that the defendants had issued materially false and misleading financial statements concerning the condition and prospects of Sykes Enterprises. In March 2003, the Court finally approved a $30 million settlement […](more)

  • Hamilton Bancorp

    United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida The Firm is one of the co-counsel actively involved in litigating this securities class action. The suit alleges, among other things, that the defendants issued materially misleading financial statements, registration statements and earnings releases concerning the financial condition and prospects of Hamilton Bancorp. In January […](more)

  • Selis v. KTI Corp

    United States District Court for the District of New Jersey The Firm served as co-lead counsel in this securities class action. Plaintiffs alleged on behalf of purchasers of KTI’s common stock that the defendants had artificially inflated the market price of KTI’s securities by misrepresenting KTI’s financial performance and condition. On March 31, 2003, the […](more)

  • Legato Systems

    United States District Court for the Northern District of California The Firm actively participated in the litigation of this securities class action. The suit alleged, among other things, that the defendants issued materially false and misleading financial reports about Legato which operated to inflate artificially the price of the company’s publicly traded securities. In 2003, […](more)

  • Corel Corporation Securities Litigation

    United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania The Firm actively participated in the litigation of this securities class action. The suit alleged that Corel and certain of its senior officers had misrepresented Corel’s financial condition and the likelihood of significant revenues from its Linux-based products. In July 2003, the federal district court […](more)

  • White v. Heartland High Yield Municipal Bond Fund

    United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin The Firm was co-counsel actively involved in the litigation of in this securities class action. The suit alleged, among other things, that the defendants had misrepresented the net asset values of various securities held by several funds managed by Heartland Advisors, Inc. In March 2001, […](more)

  • PMA Capital Litigation

    This securities class action names PMA Capital and certain former officers and directors as defendants and is filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.  Pollin v. PMA Capital Corporation, Civil Action No. 03-06122-EL. The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 […](more)

In The News