Amsouth Bancorporation - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Litigation Activity Indices

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Amsouth Bancorporation Conclusion: According to the docket, in February 1998, several Stipulations of dismissal were filed by the plaintiffs. On February 29, 1998, U.S. District Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich issued the Order granting the Stipulations of dismissal and the action, including the third party complaint, was dismissed with prejudice. The case is closed.

In a press release dated September 22, 1997, on September 22, 1997, in the first such opinion by a federal court in a case challenging bank brokerage sales practices, Chief Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich of the U.S. District Court of the Middle District of Florida denied plaintiffs’ request for class certification. Agreeing with the arguments made for the defense by Reed Smith, the Court ruled that individual issues of fact predominated over any common issues and that a class action would not provide a superior method for the fair and efficient adjudication of the case. Fischler, et al. vs. AmSouth Bancorporation, et al., Case No. 96-1567 (M.D. Fla. September 22, 1997). After hearing oral argument and carefully reviewing the evidentiary record submitted by defendants, the Court characterized as "overwhelming" issues concerning the nature of any alleged misrepresentation, whether any individual investor relied upon any misrepresentation, the individualized nature of any proof concerning damages and the factual circumstances surrounding the statute of limitations defense. Indeed, the Court held that any alleged evidence of a "common scheme" was "dwarfed by other evidence presented in the case," including the testimony and affidavits of defendants’ witnesses, as well as the plaintiffs’ admissions in related litigation that they received prospectuses and other written disclosures concerning their investments.

The original suit accuses AmSouth of tricking Belleair Bluffs resident Matthew Fischler into buying a form of life insurance called an annuity contract. AmSouth spokesman Jim Underwood said he couldn't comment on the suit because the bank's lawyers had just received the suit and needed time to review it. In the suit filed Monday in Tampa, Fischler says AmSouth misled him about charges associated with a $50,000 annuity he bought in April 1994. During the sale, Fischler asked if he would have to pay a penalty if he withdrew his money early and, if so, whether it would consume only his interest or part of his principal, too, the suit says. An AmSouth broker told him he would lose only the interest, the suit says. But a year later, Fischler withdrew his money and learned that, as part of a surrender charge, he had lost $2,679 of his principal. By its actions, the bank committed fraud and violated federal and state securities laws, the suit says.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6712
Sector: Financial
Industry: Regional Banks

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Amsouth Bancorporation
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	ASO
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.amsouth.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Fischler, et al. v. AmSouth Bancorporation, et al.

COURT: M.D. Florida	DOCKET NUMBER: 96-CV-01567
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Elizabeth A. Kovachevich
DATE FILED: 08/12/1996	SOURCE: Complaint
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/01/1993	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/02/1996
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Alpert, Barker & Calcutt, P.A. 100 S. Ashley Dr., Tampa, FL, 33601-3270 (voice) 813.223.4131, (fax) , _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 08/12/1996

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

Fischler, et al. v. AmSouth Bancorporation, et al.

COURT: M.D. Florida	DOCKET NUMBER: 96-CV-01567
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Elizabeth A. Kovachevich
DATE FILED: 03/17/1997	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/01/1993	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/02/1996
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Alpert, Barker & Rodems, P.A. P.O. Box 3270, Tampa, FL, 33601 (voice) 813.223.4131, (fax) , Chitwood & Harley LLP 7945 East Paces Ferry Road, 1400 Resurgens Plaza, Atlanta, GA, 30326 (voice) 404.266.1650, (fax) , James, Hoyer & Newcomer, P.A. One Urban Centre, suite 147, 4830 West Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa, FL, 33609 (voice) 813286.4100, (fax) , choyer@jameshoyer.com Law Offices of Steven E. Cauley PA Suite 210, Cypress Plaza. 2200 N. Rodney Parham Road, Little Rock, AR, 72212 (voice) 501.312.8500, (fax) 501.312.8505, cauleypa@aol.com M. Clay Ragsdale 1929 Third Avenue North, Suite 550, Birmingham, AL, 35203 (voice) (205)251-4775, (fax) (205)251-4777, 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: 6

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/21/2000

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint for: Securities Fraud (Ala. Code §§ 8-6-17 & 8-6-19);
Case Name and/or Number: Kerr v. AmSouth Bancorporation, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/16/1996

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

�