Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. Internet and Technology Companies Class Securities

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

Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. Internet and Technology Companies Class Securities Conclusion: According to the docket, on June 11, 2002, the Court entered the Stipulation and Order of Voluntary Dismissal. Pursuant to Rules 41(a) and 23(e) of the FRCP, plaintiffs dismiss the action, and all claims against the defendants, without prejudice and without costs to any party. The case is closed.

On April 19, 2002, the Court issued an Amended Stipulation and Order of dismissal of the action pursuant to Rules 41(a) and 23(e) of the FRCP as to defendants Credit Suisse First Boston Corp., The Goldman, Sachs Group, Inc., Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., Bancboston Robertson Stephens, Inc. and Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. without prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs.

On September 5, 2001, the Court issued the Order finding that cases involving Internet in the IPO Securities Litigation shall be consolidated into case number 01-CV-2858. The Clerk of the Court was ordered to close all cases that have been consolidated, subject to re-opening at a later date. On October 3, 2001, the Court issued a Notice reassigning the case to Judge Shirley W. Kram and the case was reopened.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by artificially inflating the prices of Class Securities, to defendants' benefit, by systematically issuing research reports (including favorable "buy" recommendations) which contained the same uniform omissions of material facts, including: (a) the alleged material fact that the internal operations of defendants effectively mandated that defendants' analysts issue a favorable recommendation as an adjunct to defendants' obtaining (and their analysts' directly or indirectly sharing in) investment banking fees and other fees and business from the issuer of a Class Security; and (b) the alleged material fact that defendants and their employees, including analysts, frequently acquired shares of class securities at a fraction of the price that public investors later paid therefor and would profit from research reports that enabled the analyst, his or her employer, and his or her co-workers to sell their holdings at generally higher prices.

The complaint also alleges that defendant Merrill Lynch violated the Securities Act of 1933 because the Prospectus distributed to investors and the Registration Statement filed with the SEC in order to gain regulatory approval for the Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs offering failed to disclose that the prices of the HOLDRs constituent securities had been artificially inflated by defendants' misleading research reports and recommendations as set forth above.

Note: This Class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of all investors that during the class period acquired securities from the following issuers:

- Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs (AMEX:IIH), - Exodus Communications, Inc (NasdaqNM:EXDS), - Inktomi Corp. (NasdaqNM:INKT), - Vitria Technology, Inc. (NasdaqNM:VITR), - Software.com (formerly listed as NasdaqNM:SWCM, now known as Openwave Systems, Inc. (NasdaqNM:OPWV)), - E.piphany, Inc. (NasdaqNM:EPNY)

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6211
Sector: Financial
Industry: Investment Services

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	CSR
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.csfb.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Theresa T. Fadem Trust v. Credit Suisse First Boston Corp., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-7161
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Kimba M. Wood
DATE FILED: 08/03/2001	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/01/1998	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/01/2001
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP 100 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10017 (voice) 212.907.0700, (fax) 212.818.0477, info@glrslaw.com Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, 10110 (voice) 212.608.1900, (fax) 212.719.4677, info@lshllp.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Securities Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/08/2001

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

Theresa T. Fadem Trust v. Credit Suisse First Boston Corp., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-7161
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Shirley W. Kram
DATE FILED: 04/29/2002	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/01/1998	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/01/2001
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, 10110 (voice) 212.608.1900, (fax) 212.719.4677, info@lshllp.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/10/2002

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

�