 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. Summary: According to an article dated February 6, 2009, attorneys for shareholders of UnitedHealth Group Inc. (UNH) asked a federal judge for $110 million in fees for their work on a $925.5 million settlement of a lawsuit alleging improper backdating of stock options. … A hearing for final approval is set for March 16. The fee request represents about 12 percent of the recovery and is based on a 2007 agreement with the lead investor plaintiff, the California Public Employees' Retirement System, lawyers from the law firm Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins said.
On November 12, 2008, a Stipulation of Settlement was filed. According to the Stipulation, the proposed settlement is in the amount of $925.5 million in cash of which Defendant UnitedHealth Group Corporation will pay $825 million in cash. In addition, the former CEO and Chairman of UnitedHealth shall pay $30 million into the settlement fund and return a total of 3.675 million shares of stock options, and former General Counsel and Secretary of UnitedHealth shall pay $500,000 into the settlement fund. On November 24, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a $925.5 million settlement, which the judge preliminarily approved on December 23, 2008. A settlement hearing is set for March 16, 2009.
As summarized by the Company’s Form 10-Q For The Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2008, on March 18, 2008, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. On July 2, 2008, the Company announced that it had reached an agreement in principle with the lead plaintiff CalPERS and plaintiff class representative Alaska Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry Pension Trust, on behalf of themselves and members of the class, to settle the lawsuit. The proposed settlement will fully resolve all claims against the Company, all current officers and directors of the Company named in the lawsuit, and certain former officers and directors of the Company named in the lawsuit. No parties admit any wrongdoing as part of the proposed settlement. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the Company has paid $895 million into a settlement fund for the benefit of class members. In addition to the payment to the settlement fund, the Company will also supplement the substantial changes it has already implemented in its corporate governance policies with additional changes and enhancements. The proposed settlement, which has been approved by the boards of directors of CalPERS and the Company, is subject to completion of final documentation, and preliminary and final court approval. Further, the Company has the right to terminate the settlement if class members representing more than a specified amount of alleged securities losses elect to opt out of the settlement.
As summarized by the Company’s FORM 10-K For The Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2007, on May 5, 2006, the first of seven putative class actions alleging a violation of the federal securities laws was brought by an individual shareholder against certain of our current and former officers and directors in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. On December 8, 2006, a consolidated amended complaint was filed consolidating the actions into a single action. The action is captioned In re UnitedHealth Group Incorporated PSLRA Litigation. The action was brought by lead plaintiff California Public Employees Retirement System against the Company and certain of our current and former officers and directors. The consolidated amended complaint alleges that defendants, in connection with the same alleged course of conduct identified in the shareholder derivative actions described above, made misrepresentations and omissions during the period between January 20, 2005 and May 17, 2006, in press releases and public filings that artificially inflated the price of our common stock. The consolidated amended complaint also asserts that during the class period, certain defendants sold shares of our common stock while in possession of material, non-public information concerning the matters set forth in the complaint. The consolidated amended complaint alleges claims under Sections 10(b), 14(a), 20(a) and 20A of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Sections 11 and 15 of the 1933 Act. The action seeks unspecified money damages and equitable relief. Defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint on February 6, 2007. The motion to dismiss was denied in an order filed on June 4, 2007 and discovery is ongoing. On July 18, 2007, the lead plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment on the Company’s liability on the Section 11 claim. The court denied the motion for partial summary judgment on October 2, 2007. The parties are currently engaged in discovery and the case is currently scheduled to be ready for trial in July 2008.
The original Complaint alleges that defendants UnitedHealth and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false statements. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and omitted material facts concerning UnitedHealth's backdating of stock option grants to defendants the Company’s CEO and the Company’s COO. UnitedHealth represented that the exercise price of all stock options would be no less than the fair market value of UnitedHealth's common stock, measured by the publicly traded closing price for UnitedHealth stock on the day of the grant. However, in reality, those options were backdated so their exercise price correlated to a day on or near the day UnitedHealth stock hit its low price for the year, or directly in advance of sharp increases in the price of UnitedHealth stock. Defendants the Company’s CEO and the Company’s COO have collectively earned over $500 million by exercising these backdated options.
As the truth concerning United Health's practice of backdating option grants became known to the market from a variety of sources, the price of UnitedHealth stock fell $6.76, or 12%, over several trading sessions.
The lawsuit has been filed on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of UnitedHealth Group, Inc. during the Class Period, and also included are all those who acquired UnitedHealth's securities through its acquisitions of AmeriChoice, Mid Atlantic Medical, Oxford Health Plans and Pacificare Health.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6324
Sector: Financial
Industry: Insurance (Accident & Health)
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | UnitedHealth Group, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | UNH |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.unitedhealthgroup.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| James C. Krause, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 05/05/2006 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order of Consolidation | Date on the document: 8/14/2006 | ||
| Order Designating Lead Plaintiff And Plaintiff's Counsel | |||
| Type: Order Appointing LP/LC | Date on the document: 9/14/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 11/28/2006 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In re UnitedHealth Group Incorporated PSLRA Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Consolidated Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws Seeking Money Damages And Equitable Relief | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 12/8/2006 | ||
| Amended Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 6/4/2007 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 6/4/2007 | ||
| Notice Of Appeal | |||
| Type: Notice of Appeal | Date on the document: 02/28/2008 | ||
| Stipulation And Order Regarding Settlement Funds | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 09/22/2008 | ||
| Memorandum Of Understanding | |||
| Type: Settlement | Date on the document: 11/07/2008 | ||
| Stipulation Of Settlement | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 11/12/2008 | ||
| Order Granting Request For Voluntary Dismissal Pursuant To Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(A)(2) | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 11/24/2008 | ||
| Plaintiffs' Joint Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Settlement | |||
| Type: Motion | Date on the document: 11/24/2008 | ||
| Notice Of Pendency And Settlement Of Class Action | |||
| Type: Notice | Date on the document: 12/22/2008 | ||
| Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement And Providing For Notice | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 12/22/2008 | ||
| Proof Of Claim And Release | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 12/22/2008 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 1/5/2009 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Verified Derivative Action Complaint | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Jan Brandin, et al. v. William C. Mcguire, et al | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 3/29/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Richard L. Smith, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 05/15/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint for Violations of Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund Inc., et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 05/19/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Ruth Polishook, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 06/02/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: James Ziolkowski, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 06/02/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint for Violation of ERISA | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Matthew T. Zilhaver, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 06/02/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Lisa De La Rosa, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 06/29/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws Seeking Money Damages And Equitable Relief | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: California Public Employees’ Retirement System, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 07/07/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Matthew T. Zilhaver, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 07/28/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund, Inc., et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 08/14/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Richard L. Smith, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 09/18/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Ruth Polishook, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 09/18/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: James Ziolkowksi, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 09/18/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Lisa De La Rosa, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 09/18/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: California Public Employees Retirement System, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 09/18/2006 | ||
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