Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 05/14/1998 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: April 11, 1996

According to the closing Order, dated May 2, 1997, from U.S. District Judge Judge Charles A. Legge of the N.D. California the parties entered a settlement agreement. As part of the settlement arrangement, the Company agreed to contribute $1.1 million toward the $12 million in costs to settle all pending securities litigation.

In April 1996, two purported class action complaints, WOODWARD, ET AL V.
BRADLEY, ET AL and CURLEY, ET AL V. MARINARO, ET AL, were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and a third
purported class action complaint, MAIZEL, ET AL V. MARINARO, ET AL, was filed
in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara. In May 1996, a fourth purported class action complaint, CLEVELAND, ET AL V. MARINARO, ET AL, was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs in the MAIZEL, CURLEY and CLEVELAND actions claimed to be suing on behalf of a class of persons who purchased the Company's Common Stock during the period February 2, 1995 to March 21, 1996; the plaintiffs in the WOODWARD action claimed to be suing on behalf of a class of persons who purchased the Company's Common Stock during the period February 1, 1996 to March 21, 1996. Certain named current and former officers and a director of the Company were named as defendants in the actions. The MAIZEL complaint also named as defendants Morgan Stanley & Co. and Stephen Milunovich, an employee of Morgan Stanley & Co. The complaints alleged, among other things, that the Company issued false and misleading
statements to the public about the Company's financial performance and prospects, in violation of California and federal securities laws. The complaint in the MAIZEL action alleged that the officer and director defendants sold or otherwise disposed of the Company's Common Stock in violation of California securities laws.

The original complaint alleges that the company and certain of its officers and directors made, and failed to correct, materially false statements regarding the company's net income, revenue and assets. In particular, the complaint alleges that the company recognized revenue related to sales of certain software products in violation of generally accepted accounting principles. The complaint alleges that the company improperly recognized revenue from these sales in spite of certain documentation within its possession or control pertaining to large fourth quarter 1995 product returns. This course of conduct allegedly allowed the company's vice-chairman of the board of directors to sell stock at artificially inflated prices. After this information was disclosed to the market, the company's stock price allegedly fell 26%.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Hardware
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: NCDI
Company Market: NASDAQ
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 96-CV-01345
JUDGE: Hon. Charles A. Legge
DATE FILED: 04/11/1996
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/01/1996
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/21/1996
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Girard & Green LLP
    160 Sansome Street. Suite 300, Girard & Green LLP, CA 94104
    415.981.4800 415.981.4846 · gg@classcounsel.com
  2. LEVI & KORSINSKYY
    212 East 39TH Street, LEVI & KORSINSKYY, NY 10016
    212.889.3700 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 96-CV-01345
JUDGE: Hon. Charles A. Legge
DATE FILED: 02/26/1997
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/01/1996
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/21/1996
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (Former New York)
    1285 Avenue of the Americas, 33rd Floor, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (Former New York), NY 10019
    212.554.1400 212.554.1444 · blbg@blbglaw.com
  2. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA)
    600 West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA), CA 92101
    800.449.4900 · support@milberg.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date