|
|
|
2 Attorneys From Girard Gibbs Selected to Best Lawyers in America 2012
Press Release |
2011/09/24 09:46
|
Girard Gibbs LLP (www.GirardGibbs.com) announced today that two attorneys in the firm’s San Francisco office were recently selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2012 (Copyright 2011 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken, S.C.). Girard Gibbs’ Daniel Girard was honored for his work in class action and securities litigation, and Eric Gibbs was recognized for his work in class action litigation.
Daniel Girard has served as lead counsel in a wide range of cases, including class actions arising under the securities, financial services, civil rights and telecommunications laws. He serves as outside counsel to the California State Teachers Retirement System and the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System. His current work includes serving as lead counsel for investors in litigation against several major banks, including multi-district proceedings against UBS AG in connection with the Lehman Brothers collapse. He also represents individual and corporate clients in international arbitration proceedings.
Mr. Girard was appointed by Chief Justice William Rehnquist to the United States Judicial Conference Committee on Civil Rules in 2004. He was reappointed to a second three-year term by Chief Justice John Roberts in 2007. He is a member of the American Law Institute, and serves on the Advisory Board of the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System, a national, non-partisan organization dedicated to improving the process and culture of the civil justice system.
Mr. Girard was selected for inclusion in Northern California Super Lawyers from 2007 through 2011, and has earned an AV-Preeminent rating from Martindale-Hubbell, recognizing him in the highest class of attorneys for professional ethics and legal skills. 2011 is the first year he is listed in The Best Lawyers in America.
Eric Gibbs is a founding partner at Girard Gibbs and specializes in the prosecution of consumer and employment class actions. Mr. Gibbs serves as court-appointed lead counsel, class counsel and liaison counsel in various class and collective actions in federal court and in arbitration throughout the United States. His experience in complex litigation extends to matters involving defective products, false advertising, unfair competition, privacy rights, employment misclassification and wage and hour issues.
Mr. Gibbs is the immediate past co-chair of American Association for Justice’s Class Action Litigation Group and past editor of the group’s Quarterly Newsletter; he also serves on the Board of Governors of the Consumer Attorneys of California and is a member of Public Justice’s Class Action Preservation Project Committee.
Mr. Gibbs was selected for inclusion in Northern California Super Lawyers in 2010 and 2011, and has earned an AV-Preeminent rating from Martindale-Hubbell, recognizing him in the highest class for professional ethics and legal skills. Mr. Gibbs frequently speaks on current issues concerning class action litigation. 2011 is the first year he is listed in The Best Lawyers in America. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann Bernstein, LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuits
Press Release |
2011/08/25 10:16
|
The law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann amp; Bernstein, LLP is investigating potential securities law violations as alleged in class action lawsuits brought on behalf of all purchasers of American Depository Shares (“ADS”) of SinoTech Energy Limited (“SinoTech” or the “Company”) between November 3, 2010 and August 16, 2011 (the “Class Period”), including purchasers of SinoTech ADSs in the Company’s initial public offering (the “IPO”) on November 3, 2010.
If you purchased or acquired SinoTech ADSs during the Class Period and/or in the IPO, you may move the Court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than October 18, 2011. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Your share of any recovery in the action will not be affected by your decision of whether to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. You may retain Lieff Cabraser, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.
SinoTech shareholders who wish to learn more about the action and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should click here or contact Sharon Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll free at (800) 541-7358. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Berman DeValerio Announces Securities Class Action
Press Release |
2011/08/23 10:34
|
The law firm of Berman DeValerio filed a securities class action lawsuit today against Miller Energy Resources, Inc.
The lawsuit alleges violations of United States securities laws on behalf of purchasers of common stock from December 16, 2009 through and including August 1, 2011 (the “Class Period”).
Berman DeValerio (www.bermandevalerio.com) brought the complaint against the Company and certain of its directors and officers (the “Defendants”) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. The case is filed as 3:11-cv-00397.
Pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, investors wishing to serve as the lead plaintiff are required to file a motion for appointment with the court no later than October 11, 2011.
The claims arise under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b) and 78t(a), (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) for class period purchasers.
The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Miller, an oil and gas exploration, production and drilling firm, and the other Defendants made material false statements about Miller’s financial results and about the valuation of certain oil-and-gas-producing assets it acquired in Alaska. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Defendants: (1) issued false and misleading consolidated balance sheets, statements of operations and cash flows; (2) failed to properly classify royalty expenses; (3) failed to properly record sufficient compensation expense on equity awards; (4) did not properly calculate the liability for derivative instruments; (5) did not properly consolidate entities under its control; and (6) improperly reported the value of certain oil and gas assets that it acquired in Alaska. As a result of these problems, the Company was required to restate its financial results. Over a series of almost daily disclosures occurring on July 28, 2011, July 29, 2011 and August 1, 2011, Miller’s stock price dropped from $7.04 per share on July 27, 2011 to a close of $3.37 per share on August 2, 2011, a total drop of $3.67 or 52%.
To receive a copy of the complaint, please call Berman DeValerio at (800) 516-9926.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than October 11, 2011, request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff for the class. In addition, you may contact the attorneys at Berman DeValerio to discuss your rights and interests in the case. Please note: you may also retain counsel of your choice and need not take any action at this time to be a class member.
Berman DeValerio is a national law firm representing plaintiffs in lawsuits against corporate wrongdoers, chiefly for violations of securities and antitrust laws. The firm has 49 lawyers in Boston, San Francisco and South Florida. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Press Release |
2011/08/22 10:34
|
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against SinoTech Energy Limited in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who purchased American Depository Shares (“ADSs”) of SinoTech pursuant and/or traceable to the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s initial public offering (the “IPO”) on November 3, 2010, including open-market purchasers of SinoTech ADSs between November 3, 2010 and August 16, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
The Complaint charges SinoTech, certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, and the underwriters of its IPO with violations of the Securities Act of 1933. SinoTech provides enhanced oil recovery services to oil companies in the People's Republic of China. The Complaint alleges that certain representations made in the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the IPO were materially inaccurate. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company’s reported sales and revenues were materially inaccurate, because the nature, size and scope of the Company’s business was materially exaggerated.
On August 16, 2011, a research report was published on the Internet questioning SinoTech’s previously issued financial statements and future prospects. The report alleged that: (1) SinoTech’s sole import agent, accounting for over $100 million worth of oil drilling equipment orders, appears to be an empty shell company with no sign of operation, a limited import history and negligible revenue base; (2) the Company’s only chemical supplier is an empty shell company, with little or no revenues; (3) the Company’s five largest subcontracting customers, which provide the vast majority of SinoTech’s revenues, appear to be shell companies with unverifiable operations with minimal revenues; (4) the financial statements SinoTech issued in the United States are inconsistent with similar filings the Company made in China; and (5) the Company has engaged in undisclosed related-party transactions.
On this news, ADSs of SinoTech declined more than 40%, to close on August 16, 2011, at $2.35 per share. Thereafter, NASDAQ halted trading of the Company’s stock.
No class has yet been certified in the above action. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. If you purchased ADSs of SinoTech between November 3, 2010 and August 16, 2011, you have certain rights, and have until October 18, 2011, to move for lead plaintiff status. To be a member of the class you need not take any action at this time, and you may retain counsel of your choice.
If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this Notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Howard G. Smith, Esquire, of Law Offices of Howard G. Smith, 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112, Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020, by telephone at (215)638-4847, Toll-Free at (888)638-4847, by email to howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com or visit our website at http://www.howardsmithlaw.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parker Waichman Alonso LLP Files Class Action Lawsuits
Press Release |
2011/08/05 09:14
|
Parker Waichman Alonso LLP Files Two Class Action Lawsuits on Behalf of Iowa Property Owners Alleging DuPont's Imprelis™ Herbicide Killed and Damaged Trees on Their Property
Parker Waichman Alonso LLP, a national law firm representing victims of defective products and toxic substances, together with its partner law firms, has filed two class action lawsuits on behalf of Iowa residents alleging DuPont's Imprelis™ herbicide killed and damaged trees on their property. The first, brought by Daryl and Mary Ann Haley of Tipton, Iowa, was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Cedar Rapids Division (Case No. 1:11-cv-00085-LRRR). A second Imprelis™ lawsuit was filed on behalf of Nicholas L. Peters of Mars, Iowa, in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Sioux City Division (Case No. 5:11-cv-04066-MWB). Both Complaints seeks class action status on behalf of property owners who have sustained damage as a result of Imprelis™.
Plaintiffs in both lawsuits allege Imprelis™ was applied to their lawns in accordance with directions and instructions supplied by DuPont. The Class Action Complaints allege that as a result of the Imprelis™ applications, the Plaintiffs suffered significant damage and harm to trees, and will continue to suffer even further damage to their lawn and garden because of Imprelis™. The lawsuits further allege that rather than being isolated incidents, thousands of trees have been reported as being infected by Imprelis™, and tens of thousands more reports are expected in the future.
Both lawsuits charge DuPont with, among other things, negligence, strict liability, breach of express warranty and breach of implied warranties. The Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief barring DuPont from continued sale of Imprelis™, and compensatory and other damages including the cost of replacing trees damaged by Imprelis™.
Imprelis™, brought to market by DuPont in October 2010, is designed to kill broadleaf weeds, including dandelion, clover and wild violet. It is touted by DuPont as an environmentally-friendly herbicide and an innovative solution to control a wide spectrum of broadleaf weeds. According to a New York Times report, reports of dying trees possibly associated with Imprelis™ started surfacing around Memorial Day, and have since prompted warnings from extension services in several states. Imprelis™ is now suspected of causing the death of thousands of shallow-rooted trees, including willows, poplars and conifers, on lawns, golf courses, parks and cemeteries throughout the country. The reports have prompted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to begin gathering information on the tree deaths from state officials and DuPont.
DuPont acknowledged it was investigating reports of tree deaths and damage possibly associated with Imprelis™ in a letter to turf management professionals dated June 17, 2011. On July 27, 2011, the company issued another letter stating that in the course of its review, “We have observed tree injuries associated with Imprelis™, primarily on Norway spruce and white pine trees.” The problems appear to be concentrated in Minnesota, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Wisconsin, DuPont said.
Parker Waichman Alonso LLP and its partner firms have now filed three class action lawsuits on behalf of property owners who claim to have sustained damage following application of Imprelis™. A previous lawsuit was filed on behalf of an Ohio property owner in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division (Case No. 1:11-cv-01517).
Parker Waichman Alonso LLP continues to receive reports of Imprelis™ tree death and damage from around the country, including from homeowners, golf courses, universities, arboretums, nurseries and orchards, parks and recreational sites, and cemeteries. Parker Waichman Alonso LLP is investigating these complaints on behalf of property owners who have sustained damages as a result of Imprelis™. More information regarding Imprelis™ side effects can be obtained at Parker Waichman Alonso LLP's DuPont Imprelis™ poisoning page. The page will be updated regularly as more information becomes available.
For more information regarding Imprelis™ class action lawsuits and Parker Waichman Alonso LLP, please visit http://www.yourlawyer.com or call 1-800-LAW-INFO (1-800-529-4636). |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
