Touchstone Software Corporation - 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

Touchstone Software Corporation Conclusion: The original complaint was filed alleging the sales of WINCheckIt and WIN '95 Advisor were overstated, because the product sold to distributors was subject to an absolute right of return. In December 1995, Touchstone revealed that it would suffer a large loss for the fourth quarter of 1995 and for the entire year of 1995. Touchstone's stock price fell by as much as 75% after these disclosures. The complaint alleges that Touchstone's 10Q's for the prior three quarters were materially false and misleading because: (1) they were not prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; (2) they materially overstated the net income and earnings per share; (3) they failed to disclose material problems with sales, orders, and collection of ode sections 25400, 25401, 25402, 25502 and intentional and negligent breach of fiduciary duties.

On January 26, 1996, the complaint entitled DARRIN J. CARAMONTA v. LARRY W. DINGUS, ET AL. was filed in United States District Court for the Central District of California, in which Mr. Caramonta, on behalf of himself and all others who purchased the Company's Common Stock between May 2, 1995 and December 21, 1995. On March 13, 1996, and on March 21, 1996, substantially similar actions entitled JACK BODNER v. Larry W. Dingus, et al. and MARC JAFFE v. LARRY W. DINGUS, ET AL., respectively, were also filed in the same Court.

On April 17, 1997 the Court entered a "Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal" approving the settlement and dismissing the class action in its entirety. Under the principal terms of the agreement, Touchstone Software Corporation established a settlement fund consisting of $500,000 and 200,000 newly-issues shares of common stock. The Company also adopted a written policy on insider trading.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 7372
Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Touchstone Software Corporation
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	TSSW
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.touchstonesoftware.com/

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Darrin J. Caramonta, et al. v. Touchstone Software Corporation, et al.

COURT: C.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 96-CV-00081
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Gary L. Taylor
DATE FILED: 01/26/1996	SOURCE: Other
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/02/1995	CLASS PERIOD END: 12/21/1995
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Dyer, Donnelly & Lilly 825 Logan Street, Denver, , 80203-3114 (voice) 303.861.3003, (fax) , Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (Los Angeles, CA) 355 S Grand Ave - Ste 4170, Los Angeles, CA, 90071-3172 (voice) 213.617.9007, (fax) , Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA) 600 West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 800.449.4900, (fax) , support@milberg.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws and the Cal. Corp. Code; Verified Derivative Complaint for Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Violation of the Cal. Corp. Code
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/26/1996
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction To Freeze Assets
Type: Other		Date on the document: 03/11/1996
Sur-Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction To Freeze Assets
Type: Other		Date on the document: 03/25/1996
Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Post-Hearing Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motion To Dismiss
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/06/1996
Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants' Motion To Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(B)(6) and 9(B)
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/06/1996
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants' Motion To Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(B)(6) and 9(B)
Type: Other		Date on the document: 09/16/1996
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 04/17/1997

OTHER DOCUMENTS

Case Name and/or Number:
Type:		Date on the document:

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

�