Transcrypt International, Inc. - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Decisions

Settlements

Litigation Activity Indices

Top Ten List

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Transcrypt International, Inc. Summary: By the Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal dated March 27, 2000, U.S. District Judge Warren K. Urbom granted the Settling Parties' Stipulation of Settlement and dismissed the case. Plaintiffs' counsel was awarded attorneys' fees of 30% of the Settlement Fund and reimbursement of litigation expenses in the amount of $458,155.39 together with the interest earned on the cash portion of the award. According to Transcrypt’s Form 10-Q For the Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2001, the Company issued 3,122,001 and 1,337,999 common shares as payment of a litigation settlement liability recorded on the books for $4,197,000 and $1,799,000.

The original complaint, filed on behalf of public investors who purchased the common stock of Transcrypt, alleges Transcrypt and certain of its officers and/or directors disseminated materially false and misleading financial statements and press releases reporting financial results. The financial misrepresentations disseminated by defendants during the Class Period created the illusion that Transcrypt was experiencing profitable growth. By misrepresenting Transcrypt's financial condition, defendants were able to portray more attractive financial results and anticipated future growth to investors than would be the case had the truth been disclosed, enabling the individual defendants to sell a large portion of their holdings in the Company at a profit.

On or around March 27, 1998, defendants unexpectedly announced that the Company would be making adjustments to the Company's previously announced financial results. Transcrypt's shares plummeted more than $6 per share on the announcement of this news, approximately 40% of the Company's market value.

Transcrypt is a leading provider of information security and wireless communication products. Transcrypt's information security products prevent the unauthorized interception of sensitive voice and data communications. With more than 800 dealers and distributors in 108 countries worldwide, Transcrypt also ranks as the third-largest manufacturer of land mobile radios in the United States.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3663
Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Transcrypt International, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	TRII
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.transcrypt.com/

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Fischbarg, et al. v. Transcrypt International, Inc., et al.

COURT: D. Nebraska	DOCKET NUMBER: 98-CV-3099
JUDGE NAME: Magistrate Judge David L. Piester
DATE FILED: 03/31/1998	SOURCE: Other
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/15/1997	CLASS PERIOD END: 03/27/1998
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Dyer Donnelly 825 Logan Street, Denver, CO, 80203-3114 (voice) 303.861.3003, (fax) , Kinsey, Ridenour, Becker & Kistler P.O. Box 85778, 601 Lincoln Square, 121 S. 13th Street, Lincoln, NE, 68501-5778 (voice) 402.438.1310, (fax) 402.438.1650, krbk@krbklaw.com. Lionel Z. Glancy 1801 Avenue of the Stars Suite 308, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) 310.201.9150, (fax) , Reinhardt & Anderson E 1000 First Bank Bldg - 332 Minnesota Street, St Paul, MN, 55101 (voice) 651.227.9990, (fax) , Toptani Law Offices 1035 2nd Avenue Suite 2 , New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.293.0560, (fax) 212.293.0550, Wechsler Harwood LLP 488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.935.7400, (fax) , info@whhf.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 6

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Complaint for Violations of Section 10(b) and Section 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/31/1998

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Transcrypt International, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: D. Nebraska	DOCKET NUMBER: 98-CV-3099
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Warren K. Urbom
DATE FILED: 03/04/1999	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/15/1997	CLASS PERIOD END: 03/27/1998
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Dyer Donnelly 825 Logan Street, Denver, CO, 80203-3114 (voice) 303.861.3003, (fax) , Kinsey, Ridenour, Becker & Kistler P.O. Box 85778, 601 Lincoln Square, 121 S. 13th Street, Lincoln, NE, 68501-5778 (voice) 402.438.1310, (fax) 402.438.1650, krbk@krbklaw.com. Lionel Z. Glancy 1801 Avenue of the Stars Suite 308, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) 310.201.9150, (fax) , Reinhardt & Anderson E 1000 First Bank Bldg - 332 Minnesota Street, St Paul, MN, 55101 (voice) 651.227.9990, (fax) , Toptani Law Offices 1035 2nd Avenue Suite 2 , New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.293.0560, (fax) 212.293.0550, Wechsler Harwood LLP 488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.935.7400, (fax) , info@whhf.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 6

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Notice Of Partial Settlement Of Class Action
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 01/27/2000
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/05/2000

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Kern v. Transcrypt International, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/02/1998
Notice Of Pendency And Settlement Of Class Action
Case Name and/or Number: Charles A. Muhr, et al. v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, et al.
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 02/12/2001

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

�