|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 5087 | Stocks | 07/18/2008
According to a press release dated April 10, 2008, the lawsuit claims that First Marblehead and a number of individual defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. Sections 78j (b) and 78t(a) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), 17 C.F.R. Section 240.10b-5.
According to the complaint, the defendants made materially false and misleading statements about the performance and quality of First Marblehead's securitizations in SEC filings and other statements to the investing public. Among other things, First Marblehead misrepresented the level of default rates in its portfolio and the default rates' effect on the Company's ability to securitize additional student loan underwritings. The complaint also states that First Marblehead recklessly disregarded that its student loan guarantor, The Education Resources Institute, was under-reserved and unable to adequately insure student loans underwritten by the Company. The guarantor filed for bankruptcy protection on April 7, 2008.
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 The parties have reached a $140 million settlement in an SEC administrative proceeding filed against mutual fund company Strong Capital Management Company and its owner, Richard Strong, on behalf of persons who own or owned mutual fund shares managed by the company. The settlement resolves security fraud charges involving improperly timed trading of mutual funds. Persons sold will take part in the settlement should contact the attorneys who prosecuted the case for more information.
Several class actions have been filed against dental laser system manufacturer Biolase Technology, Inc. (Nasdaq:BLTI), and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 29, 2003, and July 16, 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. Custom Designed Compressor Systems, Inc. Issued Materially False And Misleading Financial Statements A class action has been filed against Custom Designed Compressor Systems, Inc. CPYJ.PK, certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between September 14, 2004 and October 22, 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 sportswear manufacturer Vans, Inc. (Nasdaq: VANS) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between March 24, 1999, and May 23, 2002. 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 certain of the officers and directors of electronics services provider DDi Corporation (OTCBB: DDICQ, formerly OTCBB: DDIC and Nasdaq: DDIC) by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between December 19, 2000, and April 29, 2002. The telecom market has had its ups and downs. A class action has been filed against telecommunications company Allegiance Telecom, Inc. (OTC:ALGXQ) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between April 24, 2001, and February 19, 2002. 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. |
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
