L90, Inc. - 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

L90, Inc. Conclusion: On May 20, 2002, motions were made to consolidate the various cases and appoint lead plaintiff and counsel. Pursuant to an order dated July 17, 2002, the various cases were consolidated under the caption of In re L90, Inc. Securities Litigation, Master File No. C-02-02329-ABC. Lead plaintiff and counsel were appointed pursuant to an order entered July 23, 2002. Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended class action complaint on September 20, 2002. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On March 18, 2003, the Court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss. Because the suit was dismissed without prejudice, plaintiffs had the opportunity to amend the complaint against the defendants.

As a result of mediation, the parties reached a settlement in this action on June 2, 2003. Plaintiffs filed a second amended class action complaint in connection with the settlement on August 18, 2003. Pursuant to a stipulation of settlement filed on December 2, 2003 and approved by the Court on December 8, 2003, defendants agreed to establish a settlement fund of $5 million for the benefit of a class of all persons who purchased L90 common stock during the modified class period from April 28, 2000 through May 09, 2003, inclusive. The Court granted final approval to the settlement and entered final judgment on March 15, 2004. The settlement was disbursed on November 17, 2004. The action is now concluded.

The complaint charges L90 and certain of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. L90 is a provider of marketing services. The complaint alleges that as part of their effort to boost the price of L90 stock, defendants misrepresented L90's true prospects in an effort to conceal L90's improper acts until they were able to conceal their fraud by selling the Company to a third party prior to filing the Company's 10-K (due March 31, 2002). In order to overstate revenues and assets in its second and third quarters of 2001, L90 violated Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and SEC rules by engaging in improper 'roundtrip'transactions with HomeStore.com and its customers. These transactions had the effect of dramatically overstating revenues and assets. On February 4, 2002, L90 issued a press release entitled, ``L90 Reports Regulatory Inquiries.'' The press release stated in part: ``L90, Inc., an online media and direct marketing company, today announced that the Company has received notice from the Securities and Exchange Commission that the Commission is conducting an investigation into the Company. In connection with this investigation, the Commission has issued the Company and one of its directors subpoenas requesting documents related primarily to the Company's financial records.'' On this news the Company's shares plummeted by more than 50% the following trading day and continued to plummet further in the weeks that followed and defendants revealed further incriminating facts. On March 12, 2002, L90 issued a press release entitled, ``L90 Provides Additional Information on Internal Investigation.'' The press release stated in part: ``L90, Inc., an online media and direct marketing company, today provided additional information on the status of the ongoing internal investigation by the Company and the Audit Committee of its board of directors in response to the previously announced Securities and Exchange Commission investigation of the Company, and the request for information from Nasdaq Listing Investigations.''

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 7389
Sector: Services
Industry: Advertising

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	L90, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	LNTY
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.l90.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Couchman Partners LP, et al. v. L90, Inc., et al.

COURT: C.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-02329
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Audrey B. Collins
DATE FILED: 3/20/2002	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/26/2000	CLASS PERIOD END: 3/12/2002
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Abbey Gardy, LLP 212 East 39th Street, New York, NY, 10016 (voice) 212.889.3700, (fax) , info@abbeygardy.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 Much, Shelist, Freed, Denenberg, Ament & Eiger, P.C. 200 N LaSalle St Ste 2100, Chicago, IL, 60601 (voice) 312.346.3100, (fax) , Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Scott & Scott LLC P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Colchester, CT, 06415 (voice) 860.537.5537, (fax) 860.537.4432, scottlaw@scott-scott.com The Emerson Firm 2228 Cottondale Avenue, Suite 100, Little Rock, AR, 72202 (voice) 800.663.9817, (fax) 501.907.2556, epllp@emersonpoynter.com Weiss & Yourman (New York, NY) The French Building, 551 Fifth Ave., Suite 1600, New York, NY, 10126 (voice) 212.682.3025, (fax) 212.682.3010, info@wyca.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: 8

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/20/2002

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

Couchman Partners LP, et al. v. L90, Inc., et al.

COURT: C.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-02329
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Audrey B. Collins
DATE FILED: 8/21/2003	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/26/2000	CLASS PERIOD END: 3/12/2002
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended and Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP (New York, NY) 805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.687.1980, (fax) 212.687.7714, info@kaplanfox.com Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY) One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, 10119-1065 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) , _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Order Granting John A. Levin & Co.’s Motion To Be Appointed Lead Plaintiff And For Approval Of Choice Of Lead Counsel And Denying Couchman Partners, LP's Motion To Be Appointed Lead Plaintiff And For Approval Of Choice Of Lead Counsel
Type: Order		Date on the document: 7/22/2002
Notice Of Class Pendency And Proposed Settlement Of Class Action
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 02/03/2004
Proof of Claim and Release
Type: Other		Date on the document: 02/03/2004
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/27/2004

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
Case Name and/or Number: [Unknown plaintiff], et al. v. L90, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 11/22/2004

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

�