Westinghouse Electric 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

Westinghouse Electric Corporation Summary: According to the firm's 10-K filing dated 3/24/1999, in November 1997, the District Court dismissed this action and another action alleging similar claims. The Corporation has reached an agreement in principle to resolve all claims in the class actions. The settlement is subject to the execution of definitive documentation, notice to the class upon whose behalf the action was brought, a fairness hearing, and approval by the Court of the settlement.

The original complaint charges that, during the Class Period, Westinghouse, certain of its officers and directors, certain of its subsidiaries, the underwriters for its May, 1991 public offering, and its auditor (Price Waterhouse), violated the federal securities laws, including Sections 10(b) and 20 of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities and Exchange Commission promulgated thereunder, by misrepresenting the financial condition of its subsidiaries, Westinghouse Credit Corp. and Westinghouse Financial Services, Inc. The Complaint alleges that these misrepresentations artificially inflated the market price of Westinghouse securities, thereby defrauding purchasers of those securities.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 4833
Sector: Services
Industry: Broadcasting & Cable TV

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Westinghouse Electric Corporation
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	WX
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.westinghouse.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Unknown Plaintiff, et al. v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, et al.

COURT: W.D. Pennsylvania	DOCKET NUMBER: 97-CV-0309
JUDGE NAME: Hon. D Brooks Smith
DATE FILED: 02/19/1997	SOURCE: Other
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/29/1990	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/22/1991
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Abbey Gardy & Squiteri LLP (San Francisco) 595 Market Street, Suite 2500, San Francisco, CA, 94105 (voice) 415.538.3725, (fax) , Curtis V. Trinko LLP 16 West 46th Street 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10036 (voice) 212.490.9550, (fax) 212.986.0158, ctrinko@trinko.com Specter Law Offices , , , (voice) , (fax) , Stull, Stull & Brody (New York) 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY, 10017 (voice) 310.209.2468, (fax) 310.209.2087, SSBNY@aol.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 4

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 04/02/2002

OTHER DOCUMENTS
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Case Name and/or Number: Zucker, et al. v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/27/2004

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

�