Multex.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

Multex.com, Inc. Conclusion: In December 2006, the appellate court overturned the certification of classes in six test cases that were selected by the underwriter defendants and plaintiffs in the coordinated proceedings. Because class certification was a condition of the settlement, it was unlikely that the settlement would receive final Court approval. On June 28, 2007, the Court entered an order terminating the proposed settlement based upon a stipulation among the parties to the settlement.

This is one of a number of actions coordinated for pretrial purposes as In re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, 21 MC 92 with the first action filed on January 12, 2001. Plaintiffs in the coordinated proceeding are bringing claims under the federal securities laws against numerous underwriters, companies, and individuals, alleging generally that defendant underwriters engaged in improper and undisclosed activities concerning the allocation of shares in the IPOs of more than 300 companies during late 1998 through 2000. In June 2004, a stipulation of settlement and release of claims against the issuer defendants, including the Company, was submitted to the court for approval. The terms of the settlement if approved, would dismiss and release all claims against the participating defendants (including the Company). In exchange for this dismissal, D&O insurance carriers would agree to guarantee a recovery by the plaintiffs from the underwriter defendants of at least $1 billion, and the issuer defendants would agree to an assignment or surrender to the plaintiffs of certain claims the issuer defendants may have against the underwriters. On August 31, 2005, the court confirmed preliminary approval of the settlement.

According to a Press Release dated May 8, 2001, a law suit was filed against Multex.com, Inc. The lawsuit asserts claims under Sections 11, 12, 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 as well as Rule 10b-5. The complaint alleges that Multex.com, and certain of its officers, directors, and auditors violated the federal securities laws by issuing and selling Multex.com common stock pursuant to the IPO without disclosing to investors that at least one of the lead underwriters, and three 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, the underwriters allocated Multex.com shares to customers at the IPO price of $14.00 per share. To receive the allocations (i.e., the ability to purchase shares) at $14.00, 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 as the Multex.com stock rocketed upward (a practice known on Wall Street as 'laddering') was intended to (and did) drive Multex.com's share price up to artificially high levels. The complaint alleges, that the artificial price inflation enabled both the underwriters and their customers to reap enormous profits by buying Multex.com stock at the $14.00 IPO price, and then selling it later for a profit at inflated aftermarket prices, which rose as high as $38.63 during its first day of trading. The complaint further alleges that defendant underwriters required their customers to 'kick back' some of their profits in the form of secret commissions, rather than allowing them to keep their profits from the IPO.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 7374
Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Multex.com, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	MLTX
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.multex.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

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

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-3910
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Barbara S. Jones
DATE FILED: 05/08/2001	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/17/1999	CLASS PERIOD END: 12/04/2000
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Lovell & Stewart 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, 10110 (voice) 212.608.1900, (fax) 212.719.4677, sklovell@aol.com Sirota & Sirota LLP 110 Wall Street 21st Floor, New York, NY, 10005 (voice) 888.759.2990, (fax) 212.425.9093, Info@SirotaLaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT

Type:		Date on the document:

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

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

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-3910
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
DATE FILED: 05/29/2002	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/17/1999	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: 05/29/2002
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

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

�