|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 3420 | Technology | 05/24/2004
The parties have reached a tentative $110 million settlement in several class actions filed against communications networking and services company Avaya, Inc., on behalf of persons and businesses whose Avaya telecommunications products did not process date functions correctly when their internal clocks switched to January 1, 2000 because of Y2K incompatibilities. Persons who experienced such difficulties should contact the attorneys for the class for more information.
Under the general terms of the agreement, eligible class members who acquired certain products between 1990 and 1999 may receive credits or a cash alternative from a fund of $110 million. The credits are valid for a three-year period and can be applied toward a 45% discount on purchases of new Avaya products and/or a 30% discount on Avaya maintenance services. Alternatively, eligible class members may receive a one-time cash payment equal to 25% of the credits to which they may be entitled. Avaya assumed liability for the case as a result of a contribution and distribution agreement between Lucent Technologies and Avaya, related to Lucent's October 2000 spin-off of Avaya. Pursuant to the terms of the contribution and distribution agreement, Lucent is responsible for a percentage of the costs in excess of $50 million, including attorneys' fees. The settlement purportedly resolves all the company's pending Y2K-related litigation. The settlement will not be effective until the court grants it final approval. The court has apparently not yet scheduled a hearing on the matter. 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 Technology Cases of Interest Until now, Microsoft has not gone to trial in a single state antitrust case. A class action has been filed against Microsoft Corporation on behalf of Minnesota residents who purchased Microsoft operating system and application software between 1994 and 2001, who allege that the software giant used its monopoly power to overcharge them for software licenses. The parties have reached a tentative $10 million settlement of several class actions filed against network security firm CyberGuard Corporation (Nasdaq: CGFW, formerly AMEX: CFW) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between January 26 and August 21, 1998. The parties have not announced further details of the settlement, including the deadline for filing claims. Several class actions have been filed against storage software designer Veritas Software Corporation (Nasdaq:VRTS) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between April 21, 2004, and July 6, 2004. The actions claim 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. Several class actions have been filed against interactive toy- and book-maker LeapFrog Enterprises, Inc. (NYSE:LF) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between August 20, 2003, and October 21, 2003. The actions claim 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. Internet security is big business in the aftermath of the 2003 worm attacks. Several class actions have been filed against Internet security solutions provider SonicWALL, Inc. (Nasdaq: SNWL) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 17, 2000, and April 3, 2002. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. Several class actions have been filed against AOL Time Warner, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased Purchase Pro, Inc., (Pink sheets: PROEQ) (now known as Pro-After, Inc.) common stock between March 20, 2000, and May 21, 2001. The actions claim 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. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
