PlanetRx.com, Inc. - 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

PlanetRx.com, Inc. Conclusion: On December 5, 2006, the Court of Appeals issued an opinion, reversing the District Court’s order granting class certification and finding that plaintiffs cannot satisfy certain elements required for class actions. On June 25, 2007, in light of the Court of Appeals’ decision, the District Court entered an order terminating the proposed settlement based on a stipulation among the parties to the settlement. On August 14, 2007, the plaintiffs filed amended complaints in the focus cases, seeking to address the deficiencies raised in the Court of Appeals’ opinion. On September 27, 2007, plaintiffs moved to certify the classes in those focus cases.

According to the Company’s FORM 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, the action is being coordinated with approximately 300 other nearly identical actions filed against other companies that had initial public offerings of securities between the 1997 and 2000 time periods. The Company has approved a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") and related agreements which set forth the terms of a settlement between the Company, the plaintiff class and the vast majority of the other approximately 300 issuer defendants. Among other provisions, the settlement contemplated by the MOU provides for a release of the Company and the individual defendants for the conduct alleged in the action to be wrongful. The Company would agree to undertake certain responsibilities, including agreeing to assign away, not assert, or release certain potential claims the Company may have against its underwriters. It is anticipated that any potential financial obligation of the Company to plaintiffs pursuant to the terms of the MOU and related agreements will be covered by existing insurance. Therefore, the Company does not expect that the settlement will involve any payment by the Company. The MOU and related agreements are subject to a number of contingencies, including the negotiation of a settlement agreement and its approval by the Court. The Court will hold a Settlement Fairness Hearing at 10:00 a.m., on April 24, 2006, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York 10007. At this hearing, the Court will consider whether the Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate. If there are objections, the Court will consider them. After the hearing, the Court will decide whether or not to approve the Settlement.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing and selling Planetrx.com common stock pursuant to the 10/06/1999 IPO without disclosing to investors that at least two of the lead underwriters and two of the other underwriters in the offering had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors. In exchange for the excessive commissions, the complaint alleges, lead underwriters the Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., and BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc. and underwriters Merril Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. and Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. allocated Planet Rx.com shares to customers at the IPO price of $16 per share. To receive the allocations at $16, the defendant underwriters' brokerage customers had to agree to purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at progressively higher prices. The requirement that customers make additional purchases at progressively higher prices was intended to and did drive Planetrx.com's share up to artificially high levels. This artificial price inflation enabled both the underwriters and their customers to reap enormous profits by buying stock at the $16 IPO price and then selling it later for a profit at inflated aftermarket prices, which rose as high as $36.50 during its first day of trading.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 5940
Sector: Services
Industry: Retail (Drugs)

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	PlanetRx.com, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	PLRX
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.PlanetRx.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

SDR Investors, LP., et al. v. PlanetRx.com, Inc., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-02621
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein
DATE FILED: 03/27/2001	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/06/1999	CLASS PERIOD END: 03/23/2001
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Brodsky & Smith, LLC 11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.668.7987., (fax) 610.660.0450, esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com Cauley, Geller, Bowman, Coates & Rudman LLP (San Diego, CA) 225 Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA, 92010 (voice) 619.702.7350, (fax) 619.702.7351, Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, 10110 (voice) 212.608.1900, (fax) 212.719.4677, info@lshllp.com 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 Schatz & Nobel, P.C. 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT, 06106 (voice) 800.797.5499, (fax) 860.493.6290, sn06106@AOL.com Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 6

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT

Type:		Date on the document:

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re Planetrx.Com, Inc. Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-02621
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
DATE FILED: 04/19/2002	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/06/1999	CLASS PERIOD END: 12/06/2000
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP (New York, NY) 10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, New York, NY, 10016 (voice) 800.217.1522, (fax) , info@bernlieb.com Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY) One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, 10119-1065 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) , Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Sirota & Sirota LLP 110 Wall Street 21st Floor, New York, NY, 10005 (voice) 888.759.2990, (fax) 212.425.9093, Info@SirotaLaw.com Stull, Stull & Brody (New York) 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY, 10017 (voice) 310.209.2468, (fax) 310.209.2087, SSBNY@aol.com Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY, 10016 (voice) 212.545.4600, (fax) 212.686.0114, newyork@whafh.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 6

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/19/2002
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 01/20/2005
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/28/2007

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Tanumihardjo and Levine, et al. v. PlanetRx.com, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/18/2001

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

�