Coca-Cola Enterprises, 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

Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. Conclusion: On February 7, 2007 the judge granted defendants' motion to dismiss but provided leave for an amended complaint to be filed. Plaintiffs did so, entering the Second Consolidated Complaint on March 12, 2007. Again defendants moved for dismissal, and again their motion was granted with prejudice on October 3, 2007.

On May 22, 2006, the Court entered the Order consolidating all actions under master file number 1:06-cv-275-TWT. The Court further granted the motion to appoint lead plaintiff and approve Lead Plaintiff's Selection of Lead Counsel. The Court granted the motion to dismiss the Argento Complaint without prejudice. On June 30, 2006, the plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint, and the defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint.

The original Complaint alleges that the Defendants violated Sections 10(b), 20(a) and 20A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by failing to disclose to the investing public that CCE had a longstanding and systemic practice of channel stuffing -- forcing extra product onto its customers to boost revenue. CCE's reported financial results and future earnings prospects were materially misleading without disclosure about CCE's channel stuffing practices and how those practices affected CCE's financial condition. The complaint also alleges that CCE's channel stuffing resulted in the improper recognition of revenue in violation of GAAP.

While defendants were misrepresenting CCE's financial condition, and CCE's stock price climbed through the Class Period, the individual defendants engaged in substantial insider trading. For example, Defendant Johnston sold over $172 million worth of his CCE stock, representing 19.52% of his holdings or 6,481,082 shares. Defendant Mannelly sold approximately 372,396 shares of his CCE common stock, with proceeds totaling approximately $9,353,964, and Defendant Van Houten sold approximately 225,953 shares of CCE common stock, for proceeds totaling approximately $6,123,757. Other individual defendants sold substantial amounts of CCE stock as well.

The complaint further alleges that on or around July 29, 2004, CCE made a partial corrective disclosure regarding CCE's true financial condition and diminished future earnings prospects. Reacting to CCE's disclosures, and the individual defendants' insider trading activities, investors hammered CCE's stock price on record trading volumes. Thus, by the close of business on July 29, CCE's stock price fell by approximately 25% or $5 per share, erasing nearly $3.1 billion of CCE's then $12.5 billion market capitalization.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2086
Sector: Consumer Non-Cyclical
Industry: Beverages (Non-Alcoholic)

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	CCE
COMPANY WEBSITE:	Web Site: http://www.cokecce.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Argento Trading Company, L.P., et al. v. Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc., et al.

COURT: N.D. Georgia	DOCKET NUMBER: 06-CV-00275
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Thomas W. Thrash Jr.
DATE FILED: 02/07/2006	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/15/2003	CLASS PERIOD END: 07/28/2004
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Chitwood Harley Harnes LLP 2300 Promenade II; 1230 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA, 30309 (voice) 888.873.3999, (fax) 404.876.4476, info@chitwoodlaw.com 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 Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego) 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.231.1058, (fax) 619.231.7423, Motley Rice LLC One Georgia Center; 600 West Peachtree Street, Suite 800, Atlanta, GA, 30308 (voice) 1-800-768-4026, (fax) , webmaster@motleyrice.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 _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 5

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Securities Fraud
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 02/07/2006

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: N.D. Georgia	DOCKET NUMBER: 06-CV-00275
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Thomas W. Thrash Jr.
DATE FILED: 03/12/2007	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/15/2003	CLASS PERIOD END: 07/29/2004
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended and Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Chitwood Harley Harnes LLP 2300 Promenade II; 1230 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA, 30309 (voice) 888.873.3999, (fax) 404.876.4476, info@chitwoodlaw.com Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 06/30/2006
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 11/07/2006
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 2/7/2007
Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 3/12/2007
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 10/3/2007
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/3/2007

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Bellur Ramanath, et al. v. Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 3/31/2006

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

�