 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Globalstar Telecommunications Limited Conclusion: On October 2, 2006, the Court entered the certified copy of the Mandate from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The appeal was withdrawn. On May 25, 2007, the Court entered the Order signed by U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel authorizing the distribution of the net settlement fund.
According to the latest docket posted, on December 9, 2005, the settlement hearing was held and the settlement was approved. On December 13, 2005, the Court entered the Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice signed by U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel. In January 2006, two notice of appeals were filed regarding the Judgment and are currently pending in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
As reported by the Lead Plaintiff Counsel's website, on July 18, 2005, near the end of the second week of trial in In re Globalstar Securities Litigation, a cash settlement of $20 million dollars was reached for the benefit of the certified class by Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. with the sole defendant, the former CEO and Chairman of Globalstar. The settlement was preliminarily approved by Judge P. Kevin Castel of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York the same day, and the 10-person jury was discharged.
Pursuant to a case management order dated January 9, 2004, depositions were to be completed by November 30, 2004 with all expert discovery due by January 31, 2005 for plaintiffs and March 31, 2005 for defendants. In another order dated November 12, 2004, Judge Castel set a trial date of July 6, 2005. On June 8, 2005, defendants filed for summary judgment. In an order dated June 23, 2005, Judge Castel decided not to rule on the motion in advance of trial, but ordered both parties to present oral argument on the motion on June 29, 2005. Trial began on July 6, 2005 and the defendants' motion for summary judgment was denied. On July 17, 2005, the parties reached a tentative agreement to settle the litigation for $20,000,000. Judge Castel preliminarily approved the settlement.
Additional cases were filed on behalf of shareholders. On April 30, 2001, motions were made for the appointment of Lead Plaintiff and Counsel. Pursuant to an order dated October 4, 2001, the cases were consolidated under the caption In Re Globalstar Securities Litigation, Master File No. 01 Civ. 1748 (SHS) and Lead Plaintiff and Counsel were appointed. Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint on November 13, 2001. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on February 25, 2002. On April 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed an opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss. Defendants filed a reply in support of their motion to dismiss on May 10, 2002, on which date defendants Schwartz and Loral filed their own motion to dismiss with supporting papers. On December 15, 2003, the Court denied the Company’s motion to dismiss. Defendants answered the complaint on February 2, 2004. Due the Bankruptcy filing of Schwartz and Loral, their motion to dismiss was withdrawn without prejudice on April 9, 2004. Globalstar has also voluntarily initiated Bankruptcy proceedings. On August 2, 2004, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification. Defendants filed an opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for class certification on August 16, 2004. A reply in support of the motion for class certification was filed on August 26, 2004. On December 1, 2004, the court determined that the lawsuit would continue as a class action.
The original complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by providing materially false and misleading information about the company's financial condition and future growth potential, and as a result of these false and misleading statements, the company's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the class period. Specifically, the complaint alleges that throughout the class period, defendants misrepresented that the company's plans to roll out its satellite phone network was on schedule and that demand for the system was strong and in line with the company's expectations. In actuality, the company was experiencing significant delays in obtaining approval for the system from European regulators which was negatively impacting sales. Additionally, demand was less than predicted because the company's system failed to offer roaming service, rendering it uncompetitive in developed nations.
NOTE: In 2001, Globalstar and Globalstar Capital filed for bankruptcy protection and, on June 17, 2004, the Bankruptcy Court confirmed the Debtors’ plan of reorganization, as amended (“Globalstar Reorganization Plan”). GTL also sought protection under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code and was liquidated thereafter. As a result of the bankruptcy filings, which stayed all claims against GTL, Globalstar and Globalstar Capital, and the Globalstar Reorganization Plan, which discharged and released the claims of purchasers of Globalstar securities against any and all of the Debtors, and GTL’s liquidation, GTL, Globalstar and Globalstar Capital are no longer parties to this Action.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 4812
Sector: Services
Industry: Communications Services
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Globalstar |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | GSTRF |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.globalstar.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| [Unknown plaintiff] v. Globalstar Telecommunications Ltd., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Type: | Date on the document: | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re: Globalstar Securities Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Consolidated and Amended Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 11/13/2001 | ||
| Notice Of Proposed Settlement Of Class Action, Hearing On Proposed Settlement And Attorneys’ Fee Petition And Right To Share In Settlement Fund | |||
| Type: Notice | Date on the document: 09/30/2005 | ||
| Proof of Claim and Release | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 09/30/2005 | ||
| Agreement of Dismissal Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b) | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 09/21/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 05/25/2007 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Class Action Complaint | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: L.A. Murphy, v. Globalstar Telecommunications Ltd., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 03/02/2001 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Garfinkel, v. Globalstar Telecommunications Ltd., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 06/28/2004 | ||
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