Company and Case Information

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


Genesco, Inc.
Summary: According to a law firm press release, on December 6, 2007 a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock of Genesco, Inc.

The Complaint charges that Genesco, and certain of its officers and directors, violated Federal Securities Laws. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants concealed the following information, which caused their statements to be materially false and misleading: (I) the Company’s stores were not performing well and would not produce the financial results being forecast; (ii) the Journeys stores were performing poorly relative to plan with big same store sales declines; and (iii) these poor results would be considered adverse events to potential acquirers, leading to significant share price declines at Genesco.

As a result of the representations made by Defendants, Genesco was seen as an attractive acquisition target for Foot Locker, Inc. Foot Locker ultimately made an offer and The Finish Line, Inc. and Headwind, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Finish Line, subsequently made an increased offer, based on Genesco’s purported success. When the truth about Genesco’s results began to be revealed, however, Finish Line indicated it would no longer pursue the acquisition. Then, on November 26, 2007, Genesco received a subpoena from the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York seeking documents related to its merger agreement and in connection with alleged violations of federal fraud statutes. On this news, Genesco’s stock plunged to $25.44 per share on November 27, 2007.

A similar, purported class action complaint has also been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 5661
Sector: Services
Industry: Retail (Apparel)


COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: Genesco, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: GCO
COMPANY WEBSITE: http://www.genesco.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE
Roeglin, et al. v. Genesco, Inc., et al.
 COURT: M.D. Tennessee  DOCKET NUMBER: 
 JUDGE NAME: 
 DATE FILED: 12/06/2007  SOURCE: Notice of Filing
 CLASS PERIOD START: 04/20/2007  CLASS PERIOD END: 11/26/2007
 TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
 PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
  • Bernard M. Gross
      1500 Walnut Street, Suite 600, Philadelphia, PA, 19102
       (voice) 215.561.3600, (fax) 215.561.3000, bmgross@BernardMGross.com
  • Dreier LLP
      One Landmark Square. 20th Floor, Stamford, CT, 06901
       (voice) 203.425.9500, (fax) 203.425.9595, info@dreierllp.com
  • Schatz Nobel Izard P.C.
      One Corporate Center, 20 Church Street , Hartford, CT,
       (voice) 860.493.6292, (fax) 860.493.6290, info@snlaw.net
  • Schiffrin Barroway Topaz & Kessler, LLP
       280 King of Prussia Road, Radnor, PA, 19087
       (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbtklaw.com
  • Wolf Popper, LLP
      845 Third Avenue, New York, NY, 10022-6689Ave
       (voice) 877.370.7703, (fax) 212.486.2093, IRRep@wolfpopper.com
    _____________________________________________
     TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS:  5

  •  DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
    Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 12/6/2007

     OTHER DOCUMENTS
    Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
    Case Name and/or Number: Sanjay Koshti, et al. v. Genesco, Inc., et al.
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 12/13/2007

    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