Elan Corporation, PLC - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Litigation Activity Indices

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Elan Corporation, PLC Conclusion: On April 21, 2005, the Court entered the Orders signed by Judge Richard M. Berman approving the plan of allocation nof settlement proceeds and further awarded co-lead counsel attorneys’ fees of 12% of the Settlement Fund or $9,000,000 and reimbursement of expenses in an aggregate amount of $452,840.2 together with interest earned. On April 26, 2005, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order, approving the settlement and dismissing the action.

On October 4, 2004, the Company announced that it had included in its financial statements a reserve of $55 million, net of insurance coverage, to cover the Company's estimated liability related to the SEC investigation and the shareholder class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The terms of the class action settlement are subject to final Court approval. A hearing is scheduled for February 18, 2005, at which the Court will consider final approval of the settlement.

According to the Notice of Settlement date November 8, 2004, the Settlement Fund (“Settlement Fund”) consists of $75 million in cash, plus interest thereon. A settlement hearing has been set for February 18, 2005 before Honorable Richard M. Berman.

As summarized by the same notice, by Order dated August 7, 2002, the Court consolidated all such actions under the caption In re Elan Securities Litigation, No. 02-cv-0865(RMB)(FM) (the “Litigation” or the “Action”)). On December 3, 2002, the Court appointed S&T Investment Company and Dr. Norman Lefkovitz as Lead Plaintiffs and approved Lead Plaintiffs’ choice of counsel, and by Order dated December 11, 2002, appointed plaintiffs Gregory Van Kipnes, Michael Pennock, Randy Spokane and Charles Tighe as members of Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee. On or about January 24, 2003, Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint (the “Complaint”). The Complaint generally alleges that the Defendants violated §§10(b), 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §§78j(b), 78n(a) and 78t(a)) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities and Exchange Commission (17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5) and §§11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. §§77k, 77l(a)(2) and 77o). Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs and counsel for the Defendants have engaged in substantial arm’s-length negotiations in an effort to resolve the Litigation. These negotiations included conducting numerous telephone conferences between the parties and mediations before Judge Nicholas Politan (Ret.), during which the terms of any agreement were extensively debated and negotiated. … A May 18, 2004 report issued by United States Magistrate Judge Frank Maas recommended to United States District Judge Richard M. Berman dismissal of all the accounting claims and disclosure claims related to Elan’s transactions with Joint Business Ventures during the Class Period, as well as dismissal of all claims asserted against Elan’s outside auditors. The report also recommended that plaintiffs be permitted to proceed with claims that Elan failed to adequately disclose information regarding other transactions during the Class Period, but not how the company accounted for such transactions. On October 25, 2004, Elan announced that it had entered into a provisional agreement with the Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") to settle the investigation by the SEC's Division of Enforcement that commenced in February 2002, whereby Elan agreed to pay a civil penalty of $15 million without admitting to any of the allegations regarding violations alleged in a complaint to be filed by the SEC. In connection with the SEC settlement, the SEC will not require Elan to restate or adjust any of its historic financial results or information. This provisional agreement is subject to final approval by the SEC Commissioners.

The original complaint charges Elan and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Elan is an international pharmaceutical company focused on the discovery, development and marketing of therapeutic products and services in neurology, pain management, oncology, infectious disease and dermatology. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants reported favorable financial results for Elan, while concealing expenses through joint ventures, recognizing income from companies in which Elan had invested (round-trip revenue) and concealing material related-party transactions. As a result, Elan's stock traded as high as $65. Then, on 1/30/02, The Wall Street Journal published an article on Elan's accounting entitled, "Research Partnerships Give Irish Drug Maker Rosy Financial Glow." The article quoted Lynn Turner, a former chief accountant for the SEC: "What's the real substance? ... I'm taking money out of one pocket and putting it in another. That is a charade." The article went on to describe several transactions in which Elan had recognized revenue where it had funded the entire purchase price. On this news, Elan's stock dropped to as low as$22.40, before closing at $29.25 on volume of 37.1 million shares.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2834
Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Elan Corporation, PLC
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	ELN
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.elancorp.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Barry Pinkowitz, et al. v. Elan Corporation, Plc., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-00865
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Whitman Knapp
DATE FILED: 02/04/2002	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/21/2000	CLASS PERIOD END: 02/01/2002
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Berger & Montague PC 1622 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19103 (voice) 800.424.6690, (fax) 215.875.4604, investorprotect@bm.net Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (CA) 425 California Street, Suite 2025, San Francisco, CA, 94104 (voice) 415.433.3200, (fax) 415.433.6382, Finkelstein, Thompson & Loughran 1050 30th Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20007 (voice) 202.337.8000, (fax) 202.337.8090, contact@ftllaw.com Law Firm of Harvey Greenfield 60 East 42nd Street, New York, NY, 10165 (voice) 212.949.5500, (fax) , Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel 335 Central Avenue, Lawrence, NY, 11559 (voice) 516.374.0707, (fax) 516.295.3473, securitiesfraud@comcast.net Leo W. Desmond 2161 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 204, West Palm Beach, FL, 33409 (voice) 561.712.8000, (fax) 561.712.8000, stocklaw@bellsouth.net 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 (New York, NY) One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, 10119-1065 (voice) 212.594.5300, (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 Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP (New York) 100 Park Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, NY, 10017-5516ven (voice) 212.661.1100, (fax) 212.661.8665, info@pomerantzlaw.com/ Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut) P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Colchester, CT, 06415 (voice) 860.537.5537, (fax) 860.537.4432, scottlaw@scott-scott.com Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles) 10940 Wilshire Boulevard - Suite 2300, Los Angeles, CA, 90024 (voice) 310.209.2468, (fax) , _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 12

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 2/4/2002

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In re Elan Corporation Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-00865
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Whitman Knapp
DATE FILED: 01/24/2003	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/21/2000	CLASS PERIOD END: 02/01/2002
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated Complaint
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
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 Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP (New York) 100 Park Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, NY, 10017-5516ven (voice) 212.661.1100, (fax) 212.661.8665, info@pomerantzlaw.com/ _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Notice of Pendency and Settlement of Class Action
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 11/08/2004
Proof of Claim and Release
Type: Other		Date on the document: 11/08/2004
Order For Distribution Of Settlement Fund
Type: Order		Date on the document: 04/06/2006
Letter To The Hon. Richard M, Berman
Type: Other		Date on the document: 12/17/2007
Motion For Final Distribution Of Settlement Fund
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 12/17/2007
Declaration Of Marc 1. Gross In Support Of Motion For Final Distribution Of Settlment Fund
Type: Declaration		Date on the document: 12/18/2007
[Revised Proposed] Final Order Approving Distribution Of Settlement Fund
Type: Order		Date on the document: 01/22/2008
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 1/30/2008
US District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/07/2008

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Curtis, et al. v. Elan Corporation, PLC, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 02/01/2002
Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Cohen
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 02/05/2002
Class Action Complaint
Case Name and/or Number: Dodd
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 02/11/2002
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Case Name and/or Number: Curtis, et al. v. Elan Corporation, PLC, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/21/2002
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Case Name and/or Number: Curtis, et al. v. Elan Corporation, PLC, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 04/26/2005

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

�