Willbros Group, 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

Willbros Group, Inc. Conclusion: According to a press release dated February 21, 2007, Willbros also disclosed that on February 15, 2007, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas issued an Order approving final settlement of the previously disclosed consolidated securities class action lawsuit. The class action was filed in 2005 and named as defendants (1) the Company, (2) certain of its then-current officers, and (3) a former officer of its international subsidiary. The Order dismissed with prejudice all claims against all defendants. No members of the settlement class exercised their right to be excluded from or object to the final settlement, which was funded by Willbros' insurance carrier. The Court's Order ends the class action litigation.

According to the Notice of Pendency of Proposed Settlement of Class Action dated November 27, 2006, the settlement amount is in the amount of $10,500,000.

In a press release dated August 9, 2006, Willbros has reached an agreement in principle to settle the consolidated securities class action lawsuit filed in 2005 against the Company and certain of its current officers and a former officer of its international subsidiary. Under the terms of the agreement in principle, Willbros and the plaintiffs will negotiate and seek court approval of the definitive settlement. The settlement will be funded by Willbros' insurance carrier, and will include the dismissal of all claims against all defendants.

The complaint charges Willbros Group, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Defendants issued, or caused to be issued, false and misleading statements during the Class Period to artificially inflate the value of Willbros stock. Willbros is the target of numerous governmental investigations, both here in the United States by the Securities & Exchange Commission and Department of Justice, and abroad, because the Company engaged in a campaign of illegal and illicit bribery of foreign government officials in Bolivia, Nigeria and Ecuador to successfully obtain construction projects. As a result of these illegal actions, the Company has delayed filing its Form 10-K for 2004; announced a restatement of its financial results for 2002, 2003 and the first nine months of 2004; instituted a series of modifications to rectify material weaknesses in its internal controls; provided an estimate of its possible exposure for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA") (which could be as much as $650,000 per violation, not including criminal penalties of more than $2 million per violation); and withdrew its 2005 guidance. The Company estimates an astonishing 35% to 44% reduction in previously reported net income when the restatement is completed for the collective period of 2002, 2003 and the first nine months of 2004. This means that the Company overstated net income during that period by an incredible 53% to 80%. In addition, the Company also disclosed a number of previously unreported related party transactions from 2002, 2003 and 2004 that materially impacted financial results. As a result of the above restatement, the Company stands in default of its debt covenants because of its substantial reduction in net income. Because of its violations of FCPA, the Company could be prohibited from bidding for future U.S. government contracts. The Company disclosed this information on May 16, 2005 after the market had closed. The market responded immediately and the stock lost 31% on usually high volume of 6.9 million shares, trading as low as $10.15 per share on May 17, 2005, down $5.77 from its previous close of $15.92.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 1389
Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil Well Services & Equipment

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Willbros Group, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	WG
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.willbros.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Legion Partners, LLP, et al. v. Willbros Group, Inc., et al.

COURT: S.D. Texas	DOCKET NUMBER: 05-CV-01778
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Keith P. Ellison
DATE FILED: 05/18/2005	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/06/2002	CLASS PERIOD END: 05/16/2005
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Baron & Budd, P.C. (Dallas) 3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 1100, Dallas, TX, 75219 (voice) 800-946-9646, (fax) , info@baronbudd.com Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania) 11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.668.7987, (fax) 610.660.0450, esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. (Washington, DC) 1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 500, West Tower, Washington, DC, 20005 (voice) 202.408.4600, (fax) 202.408.4699, lawinfo@cmht.com Dyer & Shuman, LLP 801 East 17th Avenue, Denver, CO, 80218-1417 (voice) 303.861.3003, (fax) 800.711.6483, info@dyershuman.com Federman & Sherwood (Oklahoma City) 120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Oklahoma City, OK, 73102 (voice) 405-235-1560, (fax) , wfederman@aol.com Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C. Esquire at 261 Old York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, PA, 19046 (voice) 215.886.1900, (fax) , securitiesfraud@comcast.net Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202 (voice) 410.332.0030, (fax) , pivenlaw@erols.com Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (Boca Raton) 5355 Town Center Road, Suite 900, Boca Raton, FL, 33486 (voice) 561.361.5000, (fax) 561.367.8400, info@milbergweiss.com Schatz & Nobel, P.C. 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT, 06106 (voice) 800.797.5499, (fax) 860.493.6290, sn06106@AOL.com Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Schwartz Junell Campbell & Oathout LLP Two Houston Center, 909 Fannin, Suite 2000, Houston, TX, 77010 (voice) 713-752-0017, (fax) 713-752-0327, dschwartz@schwartz-junell.com Smith & Smith LLP 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112, Bensalem, PA, 19020 (voice) 215.638.4847, (fax) 215.638.4867, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 12

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 05/18/2005

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Willbros Group, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. Texas	DOCKET NUMBER: 05-CV-01778
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Keith P. Ellison
DATE FILED: 05/02/2006	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/06/2002	CLASS PERIOD END: 05/16/2005
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated Complaint
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York) 10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, New York, NY, 10016 (voice) 800.217.1522, (fax) , info@bernlieb.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/09/2006
[Corrected] Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/26/2006
Notice Of Pendency Of Proposed Settlement Of Class Action
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 11/27/2006
Proof of Claim and Release
Type: Other		Date on the document: 11/27/2006
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 02/15/2007
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/13/2011

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Case Name and/or Number: Donald Melster, et al. v. Willbros Group Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 05/20/2005

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

�