PNC Financial Services Group, 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

PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Summary: According to a press release dated April 12, 2007, investors will get about $9 million from claims they and PNC Financial Services Group Inc. brought against accounting giant Ernst & Young LLC in a scandal that caused PNC to restate millions in earnings in 2001. The settlement approved Thursday by a federal judge in Pittsburgh wraps up litigation that has generated a pool of about $203 million to be divided among tens of thousands of PNC investors, said Barry Weprin, the lead plaintiffs' attorney. 'This basically is the last piece of a series of settlements that have seven or eight pieces, including private litigation and parts of which are settlements with the government,' Weprin said. … New York-based AIG agreed in 2004 to pay $126 million in restitution and penalties to the SEC and Justice Department to settle allegations of aiding the flawed accounting by PNC. But that money is not considered part of the pool that will be used to repay PNC investors, nor is the $25 million that PNC paid to settle securities-law violations in a deal with the Justice Department in June 2003. Instead, the $203 settlement fund was created through class-action lawsuits brought by private investors and government actions on their behalf, Weprin said. In earlier settlements, PNC and AIG paid more than $156 million combined to the SEC for the investors' pool. Last month, London-based Ernst & Young was censured by the SEC and paid $1.6 million in restitution and interest, but did not admit or deny a role in the PNC scandal. Meanwhile, investors had also sued PNC, its attorneys, AIG and Ernst & Young, claiming they lost as much as $1 billion, Weprin said. Defense attorneys had argued the losses were closer to $90 million. PNC, AIG and the attorneys settled most of that litigation last year in federal court in Pittsburgh for nearly $36 million more, Weprin said. As part of that settlement, PNC assigned its legal claims against Ernst & Young to the plaintiff investors. It was those claims and others investors filed against the accounting firm that were settled Thursday for $9.075 million -- bringing the settlement pool to about $203 million, Weprin said.

On December 20, 2006, a Settlement Agreement was filed by the plaintiffs regarding a settlement with the remaining defendant Ernst & Young LLP. On January 10, 2007, the Court entered the Preliminary Order certifying the class representatives and setting the Settlement Fairness Hearing for April 12, 2007.

In a press release dated July 16, 2006, a federal judge has approved the balance that remained from a settlement of a class-action lawsuit arising from a PNC Financial Services Group Inc. accounting scandal. More than 73,000 shareholders stand to recover a total of $36.6 million, or about $2,600 each, based on the $193 million settlement and interest. Shareholders would get about 68 cents for each share owned. U.S. District Judge David S. Cercone approved the remaining portion Thursday.

As summarized by a law firm’s website, on March 25, 2005 Lead Plaintiffs and Defendants PNC and certain Individual Defendants entered into a Stipulation of Settlement to settle the claims against these Defendants. Pursuant to the terms of this proposed settlement, which was preliminarily approved by the Court, a settlement fund in the amount of $36,600,000 will be created for the benefit of the Class, consisting of all persons who purchased PNC common stock or call options on PNC common stock or sold put options on PNC common stock from July 19, 2001 through and including July 18, 2002. A Settlement Fairness Hearing to determine, among other things, whether the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate was held on August 4, 2005. The parties wait for the Court to issue its Final Order and Judgment. The case is continuing against PNC’s outside auditor, Ernst & Young LLP (“E&Y”). On March 31, 2005, Lead Plaintiffs filed a Second Consolidated Amended Complaint against E&Y. E&Y filed its Motion to Dismiss this complaint, which Lead Plaintiffs opposed. On March 13, 2006, the Court denied certain counts of E&Y’s motion. Thereafter, E&Y filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the March 13 Order. On April 5, 2006, Judge David Stewart Cercone issued an Order granting E&Y’s motion, vacating the March 13 Order and reinstating E&Y’s Motion to Dismiss. On April 28, 2006 Lead Plaintiffs filed their response to the Motion to Dismiss and on May 4, 2006, E&Y filed its reply in further support of its Motion to Dismiss. Prior to a ruling on E&Y’s motion, the parties agreed to settle the claims against E&Y (the “E&Y Settlement”).

In a press release dated December 22, 2004, PNC Financial Services Group Inc. agreed to a $30 million settlement to resolve a class-action investor lawsuit that accused the company of using improper insurance contracts to hedge against volatile earnings. Insurers for the Pittsburgh financial-services company will place the money in a settlement fund while New York insurance company American International Group Inc. will pay an additional $4 million to the fund.

On April 2, 2002, motions to consolidate all related cases and for the appointment of Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel were filed with the Court. On May 31, 2002 the Court ordered all related cases to be consolidated. By order of the Court, dated July 22, 2002, Lead Plaintiffs and Lead Plaintiffs’ choice of Counsel were appointed. On October 4, 2002, Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the “Consolidated Complaint”), which extends the class period to include all persons who purchased shares of PNC common stock from July 19, 2001 through and including July 18, 2002. Defendants filed their Motions to Dismiss Lead Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Complaint on December 6, 2002. Plaintiffs filed their opposition to these motions on January 10, 2003. From February 2003 through June 20, 2003 both parties filed additional briefing on these issues. Thereafter certain of the parties attended mediation proceedings in an attempt to settle the claims alleged in the action.

The original complaint charges PNC, certain of its officers and directors, and its auditor and consultant Ernst & Young, LLP ("E&Y") with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. PNC is a diversified financial services company operating community banking, corporate banking, real estate financial, asset-based lending, wealth management, asset management and global fund services businesses. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants misrepresented PNC's financial results and issued false and misleading statements with regard to PNC's financial condition. Defendants failed to properly consolidate liabilities associated with three subsidiaries PNC had established with American Insurance Group ("AIG"). Throughout the Class Period, defendants misrepresented PNC's earnings as well as the Company's ability to reduce its liabilities related to non-performing assets. In fact, defendants' failure to conform with proper accounting standards produced inflated earnings and misled investors as to PNC's true financial condition. The complaint further alleges that while acting as auditor and a consultant for PNC, E&Y was also acting as a consultant for AIG. In fact, as PNC's auditor, E&Y approved PNC's transactions with AIG while at the same time acting as an "accounting adviser" to AIG. E&Y drew up the financial structure for the subsidiaries in question and approved them for implementation by AIG. E&Y also issued a letter that helped AIG pitch its product to banks. On January 29, 2002, PNC announced that the Federal Reserve Board had contacted the Company about accounting inaccuracies and as a result, PNC's financial results for 2Q 01 and 3Q 01 would be restated and its financial results for 4Q 01 would be revised. PNC also stated that the updated financials would result in year-end earnings being reduced $155 million to approximately $412 million, or $1.38 a share. The Company also revealed that these accounting adjustments would cause PNC's nonperforming assets to rise by $125 million to $393 million. In addition, the Company announced that the Federal Reserve Board and the SEC were making inquiries about PNC's transactions and that PNC would cooperate with their investigations. These disclosures shocked the market, causing PNC's stock to close on January 29, 2002 down $5.79 or nearly 10% at $56.08 in extremely heavy trading volume of 6,305,100 shares.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6712
Sector: Financial
Industry: Regional Banks

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	PNC
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.pncbank.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Johnson, et al. v. PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., et al

COURT: W.D. Pennsylvania	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-271
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Robert J. Cindrich
DATE FILED: 2/1/2002	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 7/19/2001	CLASS PERIOD END: 1/29/2002
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 Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (FL) 515 North Flagler Drive - Suite 1701, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401 (voice) 561.835.9400, (fax) , Cauley Geller, Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (Boca Raton, FL) One Boca Place. 2255 Glades Road, Suite 421A, Boca Raton, FL, 33431 (voice) 561.750.3000, (fax) 561.750.3364, Law Offices of Alfred G. Yates 519 Alleghany Bldg., 429 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15219 (voice) 412.391.5164, (fax) , 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 Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY) One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, 10119-1065 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) , Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP 100 Park Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, NY, 10017-5516ven (voice) 212.661.1100, (fax) 212.661.8665, info@pomerantzlaw.com/ Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Schoengold & Sporn PC 233 Broadway 39Th Floor, New York, NY, 10279 (voice) 212.964.0046, (fax) , _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 9

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 02/01/2002

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: W.D. Pennsylvania	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-271
JUDGE NAME: Hon. David S. Cercone
DATE FILED: 3/31/2005	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 7/19/2001	CLASS PERIOD END: 7/18/2002
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended and Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Milberg Weiss & Bershad LLP (New York) One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) 212.868.1229, info@milbergweiss.com Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York) One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119 (voice) 212.594.5300, (fax) 212.868.1229, info@milbergweiss.com Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Schiffrin Barroway Topaz & Kessler, LLP 2125 Oak Grove Road, Suite 120, Walnut Creek, CA, 94598 (voice) 925.945.0200, (fax) 925.945.8792, info@sbtklaw.com Schoengold Sporn Laitman & Lometti PC 19 Fulton Street, Suite 406, New York, NY, 10038 (voice) (212) 964-0046, (fax) (212) 267-8137, shareholderrelations@spornlaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 5

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Lead Plaintiff’s Motion For Leave To Amend And Supplement The Consolidated Class Action Complaint (Exhibit A - Second Consolidated And Amended Class Action Complaint)
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/25/2005
Notice Of Pendency Of Class Action And Proposed Settlement With Certain Defendants, Motion For Attorneys’ Fees And Settlement Fairness Hearing And Notice Of Proposed Plan Of Distribution Of Restitution Fund
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 03/31/2005
Order For Notice And Hearing In Connection With Partial Settlement Proceedings
Type: Order		Date on the document: 03/31/2005
Stipulation And Agreement Of Settlement With PNC Defendants, With AIG Financial Products Corp., With Arnold & Porter LLP, And With Buchanan Ingersoll PC
Type: Settlement		Date on the document: 03/31/2005
Notice Of Pendency Of Class Action And Proposed Settlement With Certain Defendants, Motion For Attorneys’ Fees And Settlement Fairness Hearing And Notice Of Proposed Plan Of Distribution Of Restitution Fund
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 04/22/2005
Order and Final Judgment
Type: Order		Date on the document: 07/13/2006
Stipulation And Agreement Of Settlement With Ernst & Young LLP
Type: Settlement		Date on the document: 12/19/2006
Preliminary Order For Notice And Hearing In Connection With Settlement Proceedings
Type: Order		Date on the document: 01/5/2007
Notice Of Proposed Settlement With Remaining Defendant Ernst & Young LLP And Motion For Attorneys’ Fees And Settlement Fairness Hearing
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 01/19/2007
Proof of Claim and Release
Type: Other		Date on the document: 01/19/2007
Final Order and Judgment
Type: Order		Date on the document: 04/17/2007
US District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 11/29/2007

OTHER DOCUMENTS
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Case Name and/or Number: Rassas, et al. v. PNC Financial Services, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/10/2002

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

�