|
|
|
Robbins Umeda LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2012/02/06 09:55
|
Shareholder rights firm Robbins Umeda LLP, announces that the firm commenced a class action lawsuit on February 3, 2012 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of BioSante Pharmaceuticals, Inc. between February 12, 2010 and December 15, 2011 (the "Class Period"). The action is against the Company and the Company's Chief Executive Officer for violations of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.
BioSante Pharmaceuticals is a specialty pharmaceutical Company focused on developing products for female sexual health and oncology. Over the last decade, BioSante has been in the process of developing LibiGel, a drug designed to improve the sex drive of women suffering from female sexual dysfunction, specifically hypoactive desire disorder.
The complaint alleges that beginning on February 12, 2010, the Company, along with its Chief Executive Officer, issued a series of materially false and misleading statements to investors about LibiGel's commercial viability, effectiveness, and market potential that caused shares of BioSante to trade at artificially high prices. Specifically, it is alleged that officials at BioSante boasted that clinical data demonstrated that LibiGel had a "statistically significant" effect on female patients treated with the product, and that LibiGel was "the most clinically advanced pharmaceutical product in the U.S." Additionally, it is alleged that BioSante and its Chief Executive Officer misled investors by routinely analogizing LibiGel's market potential to the $2 billion dollar market for male erectile drugs, often comparing LibiGel to products like "Viagra, Levitra, and Cialis."
Robbins Umeda LLP represents individual and institutional shareholders in derivative, direct, and class action lawsuits. The law firm's skilled litigation teams include former federal prosecutors, former defense counsel from top multinational corporate law firms, and career shareholder rights attorneys. Robbins Umeda LLP has helped its clients realize more than $1 billion of value for themselves and the companies in which they have invested. For more information, please go to http://www.robbinsumeda.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2012/02/06 09:54
|
The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Cablevision Systems Corporation between February 16, 2011 and October 28, 2011, inclusive (the "Class Period").
The Complaint alleges that Cablevision and certain of its officers and directors violated the federal securities laws. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that Cablevision was experiencing higher retention and advertising costs; (ii) that Cablevision was losing more video customers than expected, especially in the New York area -- the Company's main service area -- due to increased competition; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects.
On October 28, 2011, Cablevision announced its financial results for the third quarter of 2011, the period ended September 30, 2011. On that same day, Cablevision held a conference call with analysts and investors to discuss the earnings announcement and the Company's operations, including the Company's subscriber loss. In reaction to the Company's announcement, the price of Cablevision stock fell $2.17 per share, or 13%, to close at $15.14 per share.
While Izard Nobel LLP has not filed a lawsuit against the defendants, to view a copy of the Complaint initiating the class action or for more information about the case, and your rights, visit: www.izardnobel.com/cablevision |
|
|
|
|
|
Palm Beach Construction Law Attorney
Business |
2012/02/05 09:54
|
Palm Beach Construction Law Attorney
Heitman Law Firm serves its clients by first comprehending the specific issues our clients face and then tailoring our representation to those specific needs. Construction law cases often involve legal, technical, engineering, design, constructability and scheduling issues. We speak the language of construction. We understand your business. We know how to read a set of plans. Our client service is based on the idea that the client should not be required to pay to
bring us up to speed on the construction issues. Instead, we make it our business to be ahead of the learning curve.
Our law firm's Florida construction law practice includes the following areas:
• Land Use Planning
• Permitting
• Bid Preparation
• Bid Protests
• Contract Drafting
• Contract Review
• Contract Negotiation
• Contract Administration
• Design-Build Contracts
• Contract Claims Preparation
• Contract Dispute Resolution
• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
• Dispute Review Board Hearings
• Administrative Hearings
• We represent both domestic and international clients
• Private Construction Projects
• Public Construction Projects
• Projects Nationwide
• Design Professional Negligence
Heitman Law Firm combines experience and efficiency in construction law to render their clients high quality legal representation. With years of experience building real world construction projects, Mr. Heitman is an expert in construction law and efficiently resolve construction disputes. Visit www.palmbeachconstructionlaw.org for more information. |
|
|
|
|
|
Murray Frank LLP Files Class Action
Class Action |
2012/02/03 10:01
|
Murray Frank LLP has filed a class action complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 12 Civ. 0672) on behalf of all individuals and institutions who purchased securities of GLG Life Tech Corporation during the period between February 1, 2011 and November 13, 2011 (the “Class Period”), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made false and misleading statements about or knew but failed to disclose that: (1) the Company’s original equipment manufacturers were experiencing production issues that impacted the packaging and appearance quality of its products; (2) consumers were responding poorly to the Company’s AN0C and stevia products; and/or (3) the Company would not meet its earnings projections.
On October 6, 2011, GLG Life Tech issued a press release disclosing for the first time a negative outlook concerning its AN0C and stevia products. On the news, the Company’s stock price dropped by 42% from a close of $3.45 per share on October 5, 2011 to a close of $1.99 per share on October 6, 2011.
Subsequently, on November 14, 2011, the Company announced financial results for the period ending September 30, 2011. Revenue for the period was $1.7 million, versus revenue of $20.9 million for the same period in the previous year. EBITDA for the period was negative $8.8 million, versus EBITDA of $6.1 million for the same period in the previous year. Following its announcement of these disappointing results, the Company’s management declined to provide any further formal guidance on revenues, EBITDA, or capital expenditures. On the news, the Company’s stock price continued to drop, from a close of $2.32 per share on November 11, 2011 (the last trading day before the announcement) to a close of $2.01 on November 14, 2011.
If you purchased GLG Life Tech securities during the period between February 1, 2011 and November 13, 2011, you may move the Court, not later than February 13, 2012, to serve as Lead Plaintiff for the Class. A Lead Plaintiff is a representative chosen by the Court who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. You do not need to be a Lead Plaintiff to be included in the class.
www.murrayfrank.com |
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman to face mortgage debt class-action lawsuit
Breaking Legal News |
2012/02/03 10:01
|
Goldman Sachs Group Inc was ordered by a federal judge to face a securities class-action lawsuit accusing it of defrauding investors about a 2006 offering of securities backed by risky mortgage loans from a now-defunct lender.
U.S. District Judge Harold Baer in Manhattan certified a class-action lawsuit by investors led by the Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi.
These investors claimed they lost money in the GSAMP Trust 2006-S2, a $698 million offering of certificates backed by second-lien home loans made by New Century Financial Corp, a California subprime mortgage specialist that went bankrupt in 2007.
Thursday's decision is a setback for Goldman, which had sought to force investors to bring their cases individually.
Class certification lets investors pool resources, which can cut costs, and can lead to larger recoveries than if investors are forced to sue individually.
Goldman spokesman Michael Duvally declined to comment.
The bank is one of many accused by Congress, regulators and others of having fueled the nation's housing crisis and 2008 financial crisis in part by having misled investors about the quality of mortgage debt they sold. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court rules against abortion protester's lawsuit
Court Watch |
2012/02/02 10:01
|
A federal appeals court in Philadelphia has ruled that an anti-abortion protester arrested near the Liberty Bell in 2007 can't collect damages from park rangers who detained him.
The three-judge panel on Thursday upheld a lower-court ruling to dismiss 32-year-old Michael Marcavage's lawsuit against two Independence National Historic Park rangers. The Philadelphia Daily News reported on the panel's decision.
The suit stemmed from Marcavage's arrest after he refused to move his protest to another area of the park. A federal magistrate convicted the Lansdowne resident of two misdemeanors.
Marcavage appealed and claimed rangers violated his constitutional rights. In 2010, a federal appeals court threw out the misdemeanor convictions. Then Marcavage filed an amended complaint arguing that park rangers were liable for unspecified damages. The court ruled against him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Litigation Attorney - Robert L. Herskovits
Elite Lawyers |
2012/02/01 09:34
|
New York FINRA Arbitration & Securities Litigation Attorney
Robert L. Herskovits
Robert concentrates his practice in the areas of securities litigation and regulatory enforcement matters. Robert routinely advises broker/dealers, industry professionals and investors in varied litigation, arbitration and regulatory matters relating to the securities industry. Robert is certified as an arbitrator for FINRA, AAA and the NFA and formerly served as in-house counsel for an NYSE-member broker/dealer.
Prior to forming Herskovits PLLC, Robert was a partner with Gusrae Kaplan Nusbaum PLLC for more than five years.
Robert received a JD from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and a BA from Syracuse University. Robert is admitted to practice in the State of New York and before various federal courts, including the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
An active participant in the bar, Robert is the Co-Chair of the Committee for Securities and Exchanges of the New York County Lawyers' Association. Robert's accomplishments were recently recognized by Thomson Reuters' "Super Lawyers", which designated Robert as a 2011 Rising Star in business litigation.
Practice Areas
•Securities Litigation and Arbitration
•Securities Industry Regulatory Defense
•Broker-Dealer Advisory Services
•Securities Industry Employment Litigation
•Commercial Litigation
Address
1065 Avenue of the Americas
27th Floor
New York, New York 10018
Contact:
Tel: (212) 897-5410
Fax: (646) 558-0239
|
|
|
|
|
Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|