Fimalac, S.A. - 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

Fimalac, S.A. Summary: Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the complaint with prejudice for all defendants. The case was closed on October 3, 2008 prior to the filing of a consolidated complaint.

On September 5, 2008 the court appointed Indiana Laborers Pension Fund as Lead Plaintiff and approved the union's selection of Lead Counsel.

On July 1, 2008 a law firm press released announced that a class action has been commenced on behalf of an institutional investor in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all U.S. citizens or residents who purchased Fimalac, S.A.

The complaint charges Fimalac and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Fimalac is a France-based international financial services company, providing financial ratings and enterprise risk management solutions.

Fitch Ratings, Ltd. ("Fitch"), a majority owned subsidiary of Fimalac, assigns credit ratings to structured finance transactions. The complaint alleges that, at the start of the Class Period, Fitch's core business practice of rating residential mortgage-backed securities ("RMBS") and collateralized debt obligation ("CDO") transactions was extremely profitable for Fitch, which enabled it to report strong growth, which, in turn, drove Fimalac's stock price to a Class Period high of EUR 80.98 per share on May 22, 2007.

According to the complaint, however, defendants failed to disclose to investors during the Class Period that: (i) the information upon which Fitch based its ratings of RMBS and CDOs was misleading and in many cases fraudulent; (ii) to continue to collect fees for its ratings, Fitch was applying lax standards or no standards at all when issuing its RMBS and CDO ratings; and (iii) Fitch was failing to monitor the credit quality of RMBS and CDOs after issuing its initial ratings, as Fitch was obligated to do, and many of these securities had deteriorated badly after Fitch had issued its ratings. Fitch is now under investigation by the New York Attorney General, the Connecticut Attorney General, the Ohio Attorney General and the SEC as a result of its practices of rating billions of dollars of securities without a reasonable basis for doing so and Fimalac's stock is trading at approximately 50% of its Class Period high.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code:
Sector: Financial
Industry: Investment Services

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Fimalac, S.A.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	FIM
COMPANY WEBSITE:

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Indiana Laborers' Pension Fund, et al. v. Firmalac, S.A., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 08-CV-05994
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
DATE FILED: 07/01/2008	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/26/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/21/2008
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville) 200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, info@csgrr.com/ _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 7/1/2008
Order Appointing Lead Plaintiff And Approving Selection Of Lead Counsel
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 9/5/2008
Notice Of Voluntary Dismissal
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 10/3/2008
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/3/2008

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

�