 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Dignity Partners, Inc. Conclusion: As reported by the Company’s FORM 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1999, in the second quarter of 1999, a settlement in principle was reached and on February 25, 2000, the Court approved a settlement agreement pursuant to which all claims against all defendants will be dismissed and $3.15 million will be paid to the plaintiffs. Under the terms of the Company's D&O insurance policy, the Company's insurer paid 70% of the settlement amount.
Earlier, according to the docket, on July 2, 1998, the Court entered the Stipulation and Order directing the entry of a judgment dismissing claims for relief I and II of the second amended complaint pursuant to Rule 54(b). The Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal from the District Court’s decision. On March 15, 1999, the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, which was later denied and entered on July 6, 1999. On November 12, 1999, the Court entered the certified copy of the U.S. Court of Appeals Order reversing and remanding the Decision of the District Court. On December 15, 1999, the Court entered the Order by U.S. District Judge Charles A. Legge, preliminarily approving the settlement. The Stipulation of Settlement was also filed that day. A settlement hearing was scheduled for February 25, 2000, at 9:30 a.m.
On March 24, 1997, the Court entered the Order granting the motion for appointment of lead plaintiffs and appointment of lead plaintiffs’ co-counsel. On April 23, 1997, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The motion to dismiss was granted with leave to amend, and entered on July 22, 1997. On September 8, 1997, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, and the defendants responded with a motion to dismiss on October 9, 1997. On December 9, 1997, the Court entered the court minutes granting in part and denying in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Specifically, the court granted the motion to dismiss as to certain individual defendants, denied the motion on the loss and causation claims, granted the motion on the section II cause of action, and granted the motion as to scienter. On March 2, 1998, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint, and the defendants responded with a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint on March 17, 1998. On May 4, 1998, the Court entered the court minutes denying the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' second amended complaint.
The original complaint alleged that the defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule l0b-5 there under and Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 and seeks, among other things, compensatory damages, interest, fees and costs. The allegations were based on alleged misrepresentations in and omissions from the Company's registration statement and prospectus related to its initial public offering and certain documents filed by the Company under the Exchange Act.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6199
Sector: Financial
Industry: Consumer Financial Services
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Dignity Partners, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | DPNR |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.pointwestcapital.com./ |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Howard Hertzberg, et al. v. Dignity Partners, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re: Dignity Partners, Inc. Securities Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Opinion | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Howard Hertzberg, et al. v. Dignity Partners, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 08/27/1999 | ||
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