Buenos Aires Embotelladora S.A. : Bonds and American Depositary Shares

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

Buenos Aires Embotelladora S.A. : Bonds and American Depositary Shares Conclusion: According to the Order and Final Judgement, dated October 8, 1998, by the U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff, the case is dismissed with prejudice and without costs against any and all of the defendants, their past or present subsidiaries, parents, affiliates, etc. Counsel for plaintiffs and the Class are awarded the sum of 33 1/3% of the Gross Settlement Fund as and for their fees. Counsel for plaintiffs and the Class are also awarded the sum of $211,505.57 in reimbursement of expenses, from the cash in the Settlement Fund, with interest. The case is closed.

In the Press Release, dated 10/3/96, the original complaint charges Baesa, Pepsico Inc. and Charles H. Beach with violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by, among other things, misrepresenting the financial condition of the Company and by failing to disclose operational problems affecting Baesa. Because of the issuance of a series of materially false and misleading financial statements, the prices of Baesa ADS's and bonds were artificially inflated during the Class Period.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2086
Sector: Consumer Non-Cyclical
Industry: Beverages (Non-Alcoholic)

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Buenos Aires Embotelladora S.A.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	BAE
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.baesa.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Western Heart Institute, et al. v. Buenos Aires Embotelladora S.A., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 96-CV-7435
JUDGE NAME: Jed S. Rakoff
DATE FILED: 09/30/1996	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/16/1995	CLASS PERIOD END: 07/02/1996
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Catanzarite Law Corporation 2331 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA, 92801 (voice) 714.520.5544, (fax) 714.520.0680, info@catanzarite.com Lawrence G. Soicher 342 Madison Avenue, 18th Floor , New York, NY, 10173 (voice) 212/883.8000, (fax) , Lionel Z. Glancy 1801 Avenue of the Stars Suite 308, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) 310.201.9150, (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: 4

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violations of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 09/30/1996

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In re Baesa Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 96-CV-7435
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Jed S. Rakoff
DATE FILED: 01/23/1997	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/16/1995	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/08/1996
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY) One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, 10119-1065 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) , _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Opinion and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 07/09/1997
Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/31/1999
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/31/1999

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

�