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


Gildan Activewear, Inc.
Summary: 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.

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.

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: 6/2/2008
    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

     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