 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Chantal Pharmaceutical Corporation Conclusion: According to the docket posted on the website, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for final approval of a settlement on 7/30/2001. On 7/31/2001, the court dismissed the suit with prejudice according to the settlement. The parties had filed a stipulation of settlement on 5/21/2001.
During the life of this case a motion to dismiss the action was denied, and pre-trial discovery in the commenced. On February 9, 1998, the Court entered an order allowing the Company's local counsel in this action to withdraw. At the same time the Court ordered a 30-day stay in the proceedings.
The Company and Chantal Burnison are defendants in an action titled Marksman Partners, L.P., on behalf of its self and all others similarly situated vs Chantal Pharmaceutical Corporation and Chantal Burnison, filed on February 7, 1996 in the United States District Court, Central District of California, Western Division, Case No. 96-0872. Several other actions asserted on behalf of a class were commenced and were consolidated under the Marksman Partners, L.P. caption. This action is a securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of the Company between July 10, 1995 and January 5, 1996, inclusive. In late January 1998, the District Court granted Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to include Coopers and Lybrand, LLP, the Company's former auditors ("C&L"), Stanson Medical Marketing, Inc., the Company's North America distributor ("Stanson"), and Fred Reinstein, identified as the President of Stanson, as defendants.
The action charges that the accounting for sales revenue, because of the nature of its distribution agreement with Stanson Marketing, Inc. overstated its revenues for fiscal (June 30) 1995 and for the September 30, 1995 quarter ($3 million and $10 million, respectively), which, the action claims, violated generally accepted accounting principles and the Federal securities laws. The complaint notes that Chantal Burnison sold 300,000 shares during the class period (the sales were actually made by CBD Pharmaceutical Corporation.) The complaint appears to rely on details of the contractual relationship with the distributor to contend that the revenues should not have been booked by the Company based on shipped orders from the distributor, since among other reasons, plaintiffs allege that Stanson, during the relevant time period, had the right to require the Company to purchase Stanson on a formula dependent on its income from the Company's products' sales, and the Company did not have a substantial history of selling through the distributor and the distribution system. The action seeks monetary damages in an unspecified amount. The amount sought on the basis stated in the complaint would be in excess of the Company's current net worth.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2834
Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Chantal Pharmaceutical Corporation |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | CHTL |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.ciena.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Marksman Partners, L.P., et al. vs. Chantal Pharmaceutical Corporation, et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 02/06/1996 | ||
| Opinion and Order [denying motion to dismiss and granting motion for certification] | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 05/21/1996 | ||
| Notice Of Pendency Of Class Action | |||
| Type: Notice | Date on the document: 09/16/1996 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| Marksman Partners, L.P., et al. vs. Chantal Pharmaceutical Corporation, et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Order Denying Motion of Stanson Marketing, Inc. and Fred Reinstein To Dismiss First Amended | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 08/12/1998 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 02/24/1999 | ||
| Lead Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 11/08/1999 | ||
| Stipulation And Order To Release Surety Bond Posted By Plaintiffs | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 07/13/2001 | ||
| Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 07/31/2001 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 04/08/2002 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: McShane, et al., v. Chantal Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 04/07/1999 | ||
| Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Henderson, et al., v. Chantal Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 04/07/1999 | ||
WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.
Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top