Impac Mortgage Holdings, 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

Impac Mortgage Holdings, Inc. Summary: The original complaint charges Impac and its top executive officers with violating the federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading press releases and filings with the SEC concerning Impac's financial results and business prospects.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that Impac's representations concerning its Alt-A loans are alleged to be patently untrue, with the Alt-A loans actually being sold to less creditworthy borrowers, so that the loan portfolio was experiencing the same risks and discounts in securitization as sub-prime mortgages. At the same time, Impac overstated its financial results by failing to write down the value of its loan portfolio, thus falsely inflating the prices investors paid for Impac securities.

The judge ordered related cases to be consolidated on November 9, 2007, at the same time appointing lead plaintiff and approving selection of lead counsel. The Consolidated Amended Complaint was filed January 8, 2008, which defendants moved to have dismissed. Before ruling on the motion, plaintiffs amended their complaint and filed a Second Amended Consolidated Complaint on June 20, 2008. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on July 18, 2008. The judge dismissed the Second Amended Consolidated Complaint on October 6, 2008 but provided plaintiffs 21 days to amend and re-file. A Third Amended Consolidated Complaint was filed on October 27, 2008.

On December 15, 2008, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Third Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint. On March 9, 2009, Judge Andrew J. Guilford granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. On March 25, 2009, Judgment was entered. On April 7, 2009, the lead plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On July 22, 2010, the Court entered the Mandate from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the decision of the District Court.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6798
Sector: Services
Industry: Real Estate Operations

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Impac Mortgage Holdings, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	IMH
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.impaccompanies.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Sheldon Pittleman, et al. v. Impac Mortgage Holdings, Inc., et al.

COURT: C.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-00970
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Andrew J. Guilfold
DATE FILED: 08/17/2007	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/10/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 08/15/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
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 Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) 369 Lexington. Avenue, 10th Floor , New York, , (voice) 212..983.9330, (fax) 212..983.9331, Gardy & Notis, LLP 440 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 07632 (voice) 201-567-7377, (fax) 201-567-7337, info@gardylaw.com Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles) 1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) 310.201.915, (fax) 310. 201-916, info@glancylaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 4

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 08/17/2007
Stipulation And Order To Consolidate Related Actions And Appoint Lead Plaintiff And Lead Counsel
Type: Order of Consolidation		Date on the document: 11/09/2007

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

Sheldon Pittleman, et al. v. Impac Mortgage Holdings, Inc., et al.

COURT: C.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-00970
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Andrew J. Guilford
DATE FILED: 10/27/2008	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/10/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 05/10/2006
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Third Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (Los Angeles) 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Second Floor, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) 310.461.1426, (fax) 310.461.1427, Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) 369 Lexington. Avenue, 10th Floor , New York, , (voice) 212..983.9330, (fax) 212..983.9331, Gardy & Notis, LLP 440 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 07632 (voice) 201-567-7377, (fax) 201-567-7337, info@gardylaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/08/2008
Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 06/20/2008
Order Granting Defendants' Motion To Dismiss The Second Amended Class Action Complaint
Type: Order		Date on the document: 10/06/2008
Third Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 10/27/2008
Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Third Amended Class Action Complaint
Type: Order		Date on the document: 03/09/2009
Judgment
Type: Summary Judgment		Date on the document: 03/25/2009
Notice of Appeal
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 04/07/2009
Mandate
Type: Other		Date on the document: 07/22/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/22/2010

OTHER DOCUMENTS

Case Name and/or Number:
Type:		Date on the document:

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

�