Gildan Activewear, 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

Gildan Activewear, Inc. Summary: The original complaint charges Gildan and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Gildan supplies activewear for the wholesale imprinted sportswear market in the United States and Canada, as well as in Europe. The Company sells T-shirts, sport shirts, and fleece in large quantities to wholesale distributors as undecorated blanks, which are subsequently decorated by screenprinters with designs and logos. The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading statements concerning the Company's financial performance and prospects. Specifically, the complaint alleges that these statements were materially false and misleading because defendants failed to disclose and/or misrepresented: (i) that sales of Gildan's activewear were performing below internal expectations as a result of a shortfall in production from its Dominican Republic textile facility; (ii) that Gildan was failing to timely write down an impairment in the value of its inventories, thereby materially overstating its financial results; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, defendants had no reasonable basis for their earnings guidance for fiscal 2008 and other positive statements about the Company and its business. Then, on April 29, 2008, Gildan issued a press release announcing that it was reducing its earnings per share guidance for the second quarter and full year of fiscal 2008. Upon this news, shares of the Company's stock fell $10.99 per share, or 30%, to close at $24.93 per share, on heavy trading volume.

On September 16, 2008, the Court consolidated several related class actions, appointed the Institutional Investor Group as lead plaintiff and approved Labaton Sucharow LLC and Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP as lead counsel. On November 17, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint. The defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss on December 19, 2008.

On July 01, 2009, the Plaintiffs' Defendants' motion to dismiss was granted. Subsequently, the court issued a judgment dismissing the case with prejudice on July 02, 2009.

On December 04, 2009, the Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration was denied.

On May 11, 2010, the parties in the case have filed a stipulation withdrawing this appeal pursuant to Local Rule 42.1. This appeal was withdrawn subject to reinstatement upon terms agreed to by the parties.

On June 06, 2010, the Court Ordered that the appeal be reinstated.

On June 09, 2010, the Court Ordered that the Appellants' motion for remand to the district court, on consent, was Granted.

On August 02, 2010, the parties to the Ontario, Quebec and U.S. actions have agreed to settle the plaintiffs' claims. A settlement agreement was made without any admission of liability, wrongdoing or fault by the defendants.

On October 14, 2010, the parties to the action entered into a Settlement Agreement, which is subject to review under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and which, set forth the terms and conditions for the proposed settlement of the claims alleged in the Complaint on the merits and with prejudice.

On March 02, 2011, an Order Approving Plan Of Allocation and an Order Awarding U.S. Class Counsel Attorneys' Fees and Expenses were issued by the Court.

On March 02, 2011, an Order and Final Judgment found that the Settlement Agreement and settlement are fair, reasonable and adequate as to each of the members of the Class, and that the Settlement Agreement and settlement was finally approved in all respects.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2300
Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Apparel/Accessories

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Gildan Activewear, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	GIL
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.gildan.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

City of St. Clair Shores Police and Fire Retirement System, et al. v. Gilad Activewear, Inc., et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 08-CV-05048
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Harold Baer
DATE FILED: 06/02/2008	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/02/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/29/2008
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 Violations of Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 06/02/2008
Stipulation And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 07/11/2008
Motion Of The Institutional Investor Group For Consolidation, Appointment As Lead Plaintiff And Approval Of Selection Of Lead Counsel
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 08/01/2008
Consolidation Order
Type: Order of Consolidation		Date on the document: 09/16/2008
Amended Order
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 10/02/2008

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re Gildan Activewear Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 08-CV-05048
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Harold Baer
DATE FILED: 11/17/2008	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/02/2007	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/29/2008
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Amended and Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville) 58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, info@csgrr.com/ Labaton Sucharow LLP 140 Broadway, New York, NY, 10005 (voice) 212.907.0700, (fax) 212.818.0477, info@labaton.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 11/17/2008
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 1/27/2009
Opinion and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 07/01/2009
Judgment
Type: Summary Judgment		Date on the document: 07/02/2009
Opinion & Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 12/04/2009
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 12/04/2009
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 05/11/2010
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 06/03/2010
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 06/09/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/09/2010
Settlement Agreement
Type: Settlement		Date on the document: 08/02/2010
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 09/20/2010
Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 09/20/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/01/2010
Preliminary Order For Notice And Hearings In Connection With Settlement Proceedings
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 10/14/2010
Class Action - Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 10/22/2010
Order & Final Judgment
Type: Order		Date on the document: 03/02/2011
Order Approving Plan Of Allocation
Type: Order		Date on the document: 03/02/2011
Order Awarding U.S. Class Counsel Attorneys' Fees And Expenses
Type: Order Approving AF&E		Date on the document: 03/02/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/02/2011

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: The Police and Fire Retirement System of the City of Detroit, et al. v. Gilad Activewear, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 06/25/2008
Class Action Complaint
Case Name and/or Number: Alejandro Alegre, et al. v. Gilad Activewear, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 07/03/2008

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

�