 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
The Clorox Company Summary: According to the docket dated May 25, 2004, on November 19, 2002, the Court entered the Judgment by U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti favoring the defendants and terminating the case. The plaintiff soon after filed a Notice of Appeal, and on February 3, 2004, the Court entered the copy of the judgment from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, affirming the decision of the District Court.
The original complaint charges Clorox with violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by making misrepresentations about Clorox's business, earnings growth and financial results and its ability to continue to achieve profitable growth. By issuing these allegedly false and misleading statements, Clorox artificially inflated its stock price from $97 at the outset of the Class Period to a Class Period high of $132-5/16. However, on August 12, 1999, Clorox disclosed that its 4thQ F99 revenues had declined and its stock dropped to $83-3/4.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2842
Sector: Consumer Non-Cyclical
Industry: Personal & Household Products
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | The Clorox Company |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | CLX |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.clorox.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Employers Teamsters Local Nos.175 & 505 Pension Trust Fund, et al. v. The Clorox Company, et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Complaint for Violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/06/1999 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re: The Clorox Company Securities Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| First Amended Complaint For Violation Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934 – Demand For Jury Trial | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/13/1999 | ||
| Docket | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 12/08/1999 | ||
| Defendants' Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss Second Consolidated Amended Complaint | |||
| Type: Notice | Date on the document: 05/18/2001 | ||
| Defendants' Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss Second Consolidated Amended Complaint - Table of Authorities | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 05/18/2001 | ||
| Defendants’ Reply Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion To Dismiss Consolidated Third Amended Complaint | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 01/18/2002 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 05/25/2004 | ||
| 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