 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Ltd. : PBHG Family of Funds Summary: According to the latest docket dated November 5, 2007, discovery has been proceeding in the multi-district mutual funds litigation. Simultaneously, some of the defendants have been involved in settlement discussions with the plaintiffs. This settlement process has been impacted by parallel regulatory proceedings occurring at the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Nevertheless, the court has been advised that several settlements have been agreed upon in principle. Additionally, numerous individuals and firms have been voluntarily dismissed by plaintiffs throughout 2005 and 2006. On June 11, 2007, the over-seeing judges issued a scheduling order calling for completion of discovery by March 28, 2008.
Additionally, oral arguments concerning numerous pending motions for dismissal were held on October 5, 2007. Those motions were ordered denied on October 19, 2007.
Numerous motions to dismiss various complaints were filed on February 25 and March 7, 2005.
In April 2004, the case was transferred from the U.S.D.C. for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to the U.S.D.C. for the District of Maryland. The case is being handled in Multidistrict Litigation, In Re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation, case number 04-MD-15862. On September 30, 2004, a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint was filed.
According to a press release dated November 14, 2003, the complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities Act of 1933 (the 'Securities Act'), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 'Exchange Act'), the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the 'Investment Company Act'), and for common law breach of fiduciary duties.
The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period the PBHG Mutual Funds and the other defendants engaged in illegal and improper trading practices, in concert with certain institutional traders, which caused financial injury to the shareholders of the PBHG Mutual Funds. According to the Complaint, the Defendants surreptitiously permitted certain favored investors, including defendant Pilgrim's private investment limited partnership, to illegally engage in 'timing' of the PBHG Mutual Funds whereby these favored investors were permitted to conduct short-term, 'in and out' trading of mutual fund shares, despite explicit restrictions on such activity in the PBHG Mutual Funds' prospectuses.
The Funds, and the symbols for the respective Funds, are as follows:
PBHG Growth Fund (Nasdaq: PBHGX); PBHG Emerging Growth Fund (Nasdaq: PBEGX); PBHG Large Cap Growth Fund (Nasdaq: PBHLX); PBHG Select Growth Fund (Nasdaq: PBHEX), formally known as PBHG Select Equity Fund (Nasdaq: PBHEX); PBHG Focused Fund (Nasdaq: PBFVX), formally known as PBHG Focused Value Fund (Nasdaq: PBFVX); PBHG Large Cap Fund (Nasdaq: PLCVX), formally known as PBHG Large Cap Value Fund (Nasdaq: PLCVX); PBHG Large Cap 20 Fund (Nasdaq: PLCPX); PBHG Strategic Small Company Fund (Nasdaq: PSSCX); PBHG Disciplined Equity Fund (Nasdaq: PBDEX); PBHG Mid-Cap Fund (Nasdaq: PBMCX), formally known as PBHG Mid-Cap Value Fund (Nasdaq: PBMCX); PBHG Small Cap Fund (Nasdaq: PBSVX), formally known as PBHG Small Cap Value Fund (Nasdaq: PBSVX); PBHG Clipper Focus Fund (Nasdaq: PBFOX); PBHG Small Cap Value Fund (Nasdaq: PSMVX), formally known as TS&W Small Cap Value Fund, LLC (Nasdaq: PSMVX); PBHG REIT Fund (Nasdaq: PBRTX); PBHG Technology & Communications Fund (Nasdaq: PBTCX) PBHG IRA Capital Preservation Fund (Nasdaq: PBCPX); PBHG Intermediate Fixed Income Fund (Nasdaq: PBFIX); PBHG Cash Reserves Fund (Nasdaq: PBCXX)
Note: PBHG family of funds (the 'Funds') is operated by the subsidiary of South African based financial services company, Old Mutual plc (LSE: OML), Old Mutual Asset Management and its member firm Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Ltd. ('Pilgrim Baxter')
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6211
Sector: Financial
Industry: Investment Services
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Ltd. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | PBHG |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.pbhgfunds.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Stephen Carey, et al. v. Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Ltd., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 11/14/2003 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 05/05/2004 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 09/29/2004 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 12/20/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 11/5/2007 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Class Action Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Schonbrun, et al. v. Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Ltd., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 12/05/2003 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Stephen Carey, et al. v. Pilgrim Baxter & Associates, Ltd., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 12/20/2006 | ||
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