|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 3496 | Stocks | 12/29/2004
The parties have reached a tentative $7,337,500 settlement in an action filed against HA-LO Industries, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between February 18, 1999, and July 30, 2001. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement must submit a proof of claim form postmarked no later than December 31, 2004, to be eligible for a portion of the settlement.
Prior to its declaration of bankruptcy in 2001, HA-LO was engaged in the promotional products and direct marketing businesses. The lawsuit claimed that certain HA-LO officers and directors misled investors: (1) by intentionally overstating revenues and income that the company earned from its direct marketing business; (2) regarding alleged problems with HA-LO’s acquisition of Starbelly, Inc.; and (3) regarding the alleged likelihood of HA-LO’s filing for bankruptcy. The lawsuit also claimed that HA-LO issued press releases and financial statements in which it disseminated false and misleading information about the company’s income and earnings during the applicable period. Pursuant to the settlement, the defendants are assigning to the plaintiffs their rights to pursue claims against those insurance carriers that provide coverage for the claims asserted. Claims against these carriers have already resulted in $7,337,500 to be made available to the class. This amount may be increased by recovery from the last remaining carrier, Zurich American Insurance Company, but this additional recovery is not guaranteed-- until all claims are resolved, plaintiffs’ counsel cannot say how much will be finally available for distribution to the class. Once the amount of the settlement fund is established, each class member’s actual recovery will be a proportion of the net settlement fund determined by their claim as compared to the total claims of all class members who submit valid proofs of claim. Based on consultations with damages experts, the plaintiffs estimate that there were approximately 190 million shares of HA-LO common stock traded during the class period that may have been damaged. Based on the $7,337,500 recovered to date, plaintiffs estimate that the average recovery per damaged share of HA-LO common stock under the settlement is $0.04 per share before deduction of court-awarded attorneys’ fees and expenses. The claim formula is the basis upon which the net settlement fund will be proportionately allocated to authorized claimants. For each claimant, the recognized claim is Shares Purchased-on Date Multiplier: 2/18/99-7/1/99 $ 3.557 Thus, if a claimant bought 3,000 shares of HA-LO on December 15, 1999, and 4,000 shares of HA-LO on October 22, 2000, that member’s recognized claim = (3,000 x $2.799)+(4,000 x $3.476)=$22,301. The recognized claim formula is not intended to be an estimate of the amount of what a class member might have been able to recover after a trial; nor is it an estimate of the amount that will be paid to claimants pursuant to the settlement. For more information about the settlement, you can call 1-800-447-7657 toll free; or write to: HA-LO Settlement The settlement will not be effective until the court grants it final approval. The court has scheduled a hearing on the matter for October 1, 2004.
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 in the Northern District Court of California against SupportSoft, Inc. (NASQAQ: SPRT), a California bases software solutions company, and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between January 20, 2004 and October 1, 2004. 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. Several class actions have been filed against financial services company American Express Company (NYSE: AXP), American Express Financial Corporation, and American Express Financial Advisors, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors by investors who purchased who purchased mutual funds in the American Express family of mutual funds between March 10, 1999, to February 9, 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. A class action has been filed against healthcare services company Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation (formerly NYSE: COL) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between April 8, 1994, and March 19, 1997. The company is now known simply as HCA Inc. (NYSE: HCA). A class action has been filed against Printcafe Software, Inc. (Nasdaq: PCAF) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between June 18 and October 22, 2002. The parties have reached a tentative $9 million settlement in several consolidated class actions filed against footwear designer Steven Madden, Ltd. (Nasdaq:SHOO) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between June 21, 1997, and June 20, 2000. Persons eligible to participate in the settlement must file a proof of claim postmarked no later than June 18, 2004. The class has been certified in several consolidated class actions filed against energy utility AES Corporation (NYSE:AES) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock, including those who engaged in option transactions concerning AES securities, between July 27, 2000, and November 8, 2002. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations regarding the California energy market to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
