General Electric Company - 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

General Electric Company Summary: The original complaint alleges that on January 23, 2009, the Company's Chairman and CEO stated unequivocally that GE would maintain its quarterly $.31 per share dividend, having sufficient cash on hand and cash flow to achieve that goal. Then on February 27, 2009, GE suddenly announced it was cutting the dividend to $.10 per share. On the first trading day after the dividend reduction announcement, GE shares fell from $8.51 per share the previous trading day to close at $7.60 per share. The shares have continued to plummet, currently trading at $6.30 per share, an almost 30% plunge. During the Class Period, the CEO sold over 52,000 shares of GE stock at $11.10 per share and other officers of the Company sold over 380,000 shares at that same price. The CEO then repurchased 50,000 shares after the announcement at between $7.51 and $8.30 per share. As a result, the CEO and the other officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading statements or knowingly or recklessly failing to know of those statements, sold GE shares at inflated prices based on those statements.

According to an article dated July 30, 2009, a federal judge has ordered the consolidation of seven securities class actions against General Electric Co. that allege the multinational conglomerate misled investors about the health of its financial services subsidiary and its ability to continue paying substantial stock dividends. In his order Wednesday, Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York also appointed the State Universities Retirement System of Illinois, to serve as lead plaintiff in the shareholder litigation. … He also approved SURS' choice of lead counsel — Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo — and liaison counsel, Lowey Dannenberg Cohen & Hart PC.

On August 19, 2009, Judge Denny Chin signed the Order consolidating several actions under Master file, In re General Electric Co. Sec. Litig. Civ. No. 09-CIV-3787 (DC). An amended consolidation order was entered in the Court on August 31, 2009. On October 2, 2009, a Consolidated Class Action Complaint was filed. The defendants responded by filing motions to dismiss on November 24, 2009. Before any ruling, the plaintiffs filed a Second Consolidated Class Action Complaint. The defendants have been given leave to file revised motions to dismiss. On June 30, 2010, the defendants filed two motions to dismiss. The motion is currently pending before the Court.

On January 11, 2012, the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part the defendants' motion to dismiss.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3600
Sector: Conglomerates
Industry: Conglomerates

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	General Electric Company
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	GE
COMPANY WEBSITE:	www.ge.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Karen A. Christiansen, et al. v. General Electric Company, et al.

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 09-CV-1951
JUDGE NAME: Hon.Richard J. Holwell
DATE FILED: 03/03/2009	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/23/2009	CLASS PERIOD END: 02/27/2009
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Harwood Feffer LLP 488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.935.7400, (fax) 212.753.3630, info@whhf.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/04/2009
Memorandum Decision
Type: Order of Consolidation		Date on the document: 07/29/2009
Order Consolidating Actions
Type: Order of Consolidation		Date on the document: 08/18/2009

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In re General Electric Company Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. New York	DOCKET NUMBER: 09-CV-1951
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 06/09/2010	SOURCE:
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/25/2008	CLASS PERIOD END: 03/19/2009
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended and Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Berman DeValerio (Boston) One Liberty Square, Boston, MA, 02109 (voice) 617.542.8300, (fax) 617.542.8300, Berman DeValerio (San Francisco) 425 California Street, Suite 2100, San Francisco, CA, 94104 (voice) 415.433.3200, (fax) 415.433.3200, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 10/02/2009
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 11/08/2011
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 01/11/2012
Opinion and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 04/18/2012
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 04/25/2012

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Bruce Morgan, et al. v. General Electric Company, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/06/2009

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

�