|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 2800 | Stocks | 01/05/2005
A class action has been filed against Putnam Investment Funds and certain affiliated companies who purchased shares in any Putnam mutual fund between November 1, 1998, and September 3, 2003. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose that they improperly allowed certain investors (named as "John Doe" defendants) to engage in the "timing" of their transactions in the funds' securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock.
Timing is excessive, arbitrage trading undertaken to turn a quick profit. Timing injures ordinary mutual fund investors--who are not allowed to engage in such practices--and is acknowledged as an improper practice by the funds. In return for receiving extra fees, the defendants allegedly allowed the John Doe defendants to engage in timing, to the detriment of class members, who paid, dollar for dollar, for the favored investors' improper profits. These practices were undisclosed in the prospectuses of the funds, which falsely represented that the funds actively police against timing. The Funds InvolvedThe following mutual funds were allegedly involved in the defendants' scheme: Putnam American Government Income Fund At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Stocks Cases of Interest A class action has been filed against American International Group, Inc. (AIG) (NYSE:AIG), certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 01, 1999 and March 30, 2005. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock. The complaint charges MF Global and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. MF Global is a broker of exchange-listed futures and options.
The class action lawsuit was filed July 15, 2005 by New York attorneys on behalf of purchasers of shares in game publisher Majesco seeking monetary compensation. The lawsuit alleges violations of the federal securities laws by Majesco Entertainment Company and certain of its officers and/or directors. The lawsuit is on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Majesco Entertainment Company (NASDAQ: COOL) between December 8, 2004 to July 12, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period") seeking monetary compensation under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC (“KGS”) has filed the first class action lawsuit against China Sunergy Co. Ltd. (“China Sunergy” or the “Company”) (NasdaqGM: CSUN) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock of China Sunergy in connection with the Company’s IPO on or about May 17, 2007, or who purchased shares thereafter in the open market. No class has yet been certified in this action. The parties have reached a tentative $4.5 million in a consolidated class action filed against former e-commerce business solutions provider Clarus Corporation (Nasdaq:CLRS) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between December 8, 1999, and October 25, 2000. Persons eligible take part in the settlement should contact the attorneys for the class for more information. According to a law firm press release, a complaint filed June 11, 2008 alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and financial results. Specifically, defendants downplayed and concealed IndyMac's growing exposure to non-performing assets, particularly loans in its pay-option adjustable-rate mortgage ("Option ARM") and homebuilder construction portfolios, and made numerous positive representations regarding the Company's capital position to alleviate investors' fears concerning the Company's capital erosion. As a result of defendants' false statements, IndyMac stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a Class Period high of $24.55 per share in October 2007.
|
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
