Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 08/17/2000 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: February 19, 1998

According to the docket posted on our site, on October 24, 2001, Judge Yohn approved the distribution of the settlement fund in the amount of $909,437.33 to members of the class. On February 4, 2003, the remaining balance of the settlement fund, $7,936.17, was authorized by Judge Yohn to be distributed to the federal judicial center foundation to be used for research and educational programs relating to class action litigation.

By the Order and Final Judgment, dated August 17, 2000, U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn, Jr. approved the proposed settlement as fair, reasonable and adequate. All claims in the consolidated and amended complaint against HHCA and the individual defendants were dismissed with prejudice in their entirety. The case was closed.

The class action complaint alleges the defendants engaged in a fraudulent scheme and deceptive course of conduct that injured purchasers of HHCA common stock. Throughout the Class Period, defendants falsely represented that HHCA, a provider of home health services, had successfully formulated and implemented a sound and effective strategy to minimize non-payments and delayed payments and disputed charges from its managed care organization clients. Moreover, HHCA represented that it was providing efficient and cost-effective service to its entire client base. These representations completely belied the truth which was that HHCA had been forced to terminate relationships with such managed care organizations clients because HHCA was unable to contain its clients continuing practices of disputing charges, making slow payments, or not paying at all.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Healthcare Facilities
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: HHCA
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: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 98-CV-00834
JUDGE: Hon. William H. Yohn, Jr.
DATE FILED: 02/19/1998
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/03/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/10/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 · investorprotect@bm.net
  2. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
    6 East 45th Street, Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), NY 10017
    310.209.2468 310.209.2087 · SSBNY@aol.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 98-CV-00834
JUDGE: Hon. William H. Yohn, Jr.
DATE FILED: 05/27/1998
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/03/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/10/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 · investorprotect@bm.net
No Document Title Filing Date