Law Firm News
Today's Date: Bookmark This Website
Saxena White P.A. Files a Securities Fraud Class Action
Legal Network | 2011/12/12 19:11
Saxena White P.A. announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of investors who purchased Hospira, Inc. common stock on the New York Stock Exchange between March 24, 2009, and October 17, 2011, inclusive.

The complaint charges Hospira and certain of its officers and executives with violations of the Exchange Act. Hospira is a global specialty pharmaceutical and medication delivery company.

The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and financial results. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose that: (i) Hospira suffered from extensive quality control issues throughout the Class Period, which undermined both the viability of and the supposed financial savings that would be generated by Project Fuel, a Company program designed to optimize Hospira's operations and increase shareholder value; (ii) Hospira was unable to remedy problems identified in FDA Warning Letters related to Hospira's infusion pumps, quality control deficiencies, and manufacturing weaknesses; (iii) Hospira's revenue guidance for 2010 and 2011 was misstated and lacked a reasonable basis when made; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' statements regarding the Company's financial performance and expected earnings were false and misleading and lacked a reasonable basis when made.

On October 18, 2011, the Company announced disappointing preliminary third quarter financial results and slashed full-year guidance, pointing to a production disruption at its Rocky Mount, North Carolina manufacturing plant, which accounted for approximately 25% of the Company's sales. The Company attributed the production slowdown to the impact of an ongoing FDA investigation.

The result of the Company's negative results was a 21% drop in the price of Hospira common stock, which fell $7.85 per share to close at $29.51 per share on October 18, 2011.

You may obtain a copy of the complaint and join the class action at www.saxenawhite.com. If you purchased the shares of Hospira, Inc. between the period of March 24, 2009, and October 17, 2011, inclusive, you may contact Joe White or Greg Stone at Saxena White P.A. to discuss your rights and interests.

If you purchased Hospira, Inc. shares during the Class Period of March 24, 2009, and October 17, 2011, inclusive, and wish to apply to be the lead plaintiff in this action, a motion on your behalf must be filed with the Court no later than January 20, 2012. You may contact Saxena White P.A. to discuss your rights regarding the appointment of lead plaintiff and your interest in the class action. Please note that you may also retain counsel of your choice and need not take any action at this time to be a class member.

Saxena White P.A., which has offices in Boca Raton, Boston and Montana, specializes in prosecuting securities fraud and complex class actions on behalf of institutions and individuals. Currently serving as lead counsel in numerous securities fraud class actions nationwide, the firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of injured investors and is active in major litigation pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States.

Contact: www.saxenawhite.com


CA same-sex marriage ban gets another day in court
Legal Network | 2011/12/09 21:17
The sponsors of California's gay marriage ban renewed their effort Thursday to disqualify a federal judge because of his same-sex relationship, but they met a skeptical audience in an appeals court panel.

It's the first time an American jurist's sexual orientation has been cited as grounds for overturning a court decision.

Lawyers for a coalition of religious conservative groups told a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker should have revealed he had a long-term male partner before he presided over a trial on the measure's constitutionality. He also should have stated whether he had any interest in getting married, the lawyers said.

Because he did not, Walker's impartiality stands in doubt and the decision he ultimately made to strike down Proposition 8 as a violation of Californians' civil rights must be reversed, said Charles Cooper, an attorney for the ban's backers.

"In May 2009, when Judge Walker read the allegations of the complaint, he knew something the litigants and the public did not know: He knew that he, too, like the plaintiffs, was a gay resident of California who was involved in a long-term, serious relationship with an individual of the same sex," Cooper said. "The litigants did not have any knowledge of these facts, and it appears that Judge Walker made the deliberate decision not to disclose these facts."


NYC lawyer: Boy a menace before shopping cart case
Legal Network | 2011/12/07 17:21
Officials say a 13-year-old had a history of troubling behavior before he helped push a shopping cart that fell on a woman from a fourth-floor walkway at a New York City mall.

A city lawyer told a judge Tuesday the boy tried to run schoolmates over on his bike, threw things in the lunchroom and hit his mother's cat.

The attorney says the boy joked around at a police precinct after his Oct. 30 arrest and expressed more concern about his sneakers than about the woman who was seriously hurt.

The boy's lawyer says the teen needs and wants counseling for his behavioral problems.

The boy was charged as a juvenile and pleaded guilty in Family Court last month to assault. His sentencing was postponed Tuesday until later this month.


Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action
Legal Network | 2011/12/05 18:24
Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Pain Therapeutics, Inc. and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in the United States District Court, Western District of Texas, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities who purchased PTIE securities during the period from February 3, 2011 through June 23, 2011. This class action is brought under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Sections 78j(b) and 78t(a); and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the SEC, 17 C.F.R. Section 240.10b-5.

If you are a shareholder who purchased PTIE securities during the Class Period, you have until January 31, 2012 to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff for the class. A copy of the complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Rachelle R. Boyle at rrboyle@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529, toll free, x350. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address and telephone number.

The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, PTIE made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose material facts about a new drug, REMOXY. Specifically, PTIE failed to disclose that REMOXY was not approvable by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration due to chemistry, manufacturing, and control deficiencies that caused inconsistent results during laboratory tests.

On June 24, 2011, the Company announced that the Company had received a Complete Response Letter from the FDA on the New Drug Application for REMOXY. As a result of this revelation, PTIE's shares declined $3.94 per share or nearly 43%, to close at $5.30 per share on June 24, 2011.

On June 27, 2011, the Company disclosed that the FDA's Complete Response Letter raised concerns related to, among other things, the chemistry, manufacturing, and controls sections of the NDA for REMOXY. As a result of this revelation, PTIE's shares declined an additional $1.37 per share or nearly 26%, to close at $3.93 per share on June 27, 2011.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago and Washington, D.C., is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 70 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.


[PREV] [1] ..[53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61].. [83] [NEXT]
All
Legal Network
Law Firm News
Court Issues
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Topics
Blog News
Press Release
Legal Opinions
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Court upholds mandatory pris..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
Supreme Court casts doubt on..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Websites
Indianapolis Personal Injury Law Firm
Indiana, IN Personal Injury Attorneys
www.williamspiatt.com
Surry County Criminal Defense Lawyers
Yadkin County Family Law Attorneys
www.dirussolaw.com
Oregon DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Chicago Work Accident Lawyer
Chicago Workplace Injury Attorneys
www.krol-law.com
San Bernardino Criminal Defense Attorneys
DUI Lawyer
www.bullardpowell.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
   Legal Resource Links
  U.S. Legal News
 
 
© Law Firm News Network. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Law Firm News Network as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Legal Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. Affordable Law Firm Website Design