Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 04/26/2000 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: January 13, 1999

On April 26, 2000, the Court entered a Judgment by U.S. District Judge John W. Sedwick granting the defendants motion, recorded in the Minute Entry on March 23, 2000, to dismiss both the consolidated amended complaint and the class action complaint.

As summarized by the Company’s FORM 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1999, following the filing of the Bernat action, lawsuits were filed by Norman Wiss, Theodore J. Bloukos, Gwen Werboski, Elmer S. Martin, Linda May, Ivan Sommer, David Hesrick and Michael J. Corn all purporting to act on behalf of the same class of shareholders for the same class period, making substantially similar allegations. These actions were consolidated into one action by an order of the U.S. District Court. Pursuant to the Court’s order, plaintiffs filed a Consolidated and Amended Class Action Complaint which supercedes their prior complaints. The Consolidated and Amended Class Action Complaint alleges a new class period of December 1, 1997 through July 30, 1998, and omits allegations that the Company misrepresented its financial statements. Plaintiffs also filed a new Class Action Complaint that attempts to allege claims under Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 on behalf of all purchasers of our common stock issued pursuant to the Company's secondary public offering on May 5, 1998. The Company has filed motions to dismiss the Consolidated and Amended Class Action Complaint and the Class Action Complaint and a motion to strike the Class Action Complaint. These motions are fully briefed and under submission with the U.S. District Court.

The original Complaint charges that JDAS and certain of its officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by misrepresenting or failing to disclose material information about JDAS? operations and financial condition. According to the Complaint, defendants overstated its reported revenues and earnings, misled investors about demands for its products and services, and reported revenue and earnings growth throughout 1998 and 1999. More specifically, defendants failed to disclose significant problems with its new products, declining revenues from its licensing operations and disarray among its sales force. On January 5, 1999, JDA software disclosed that it would restate its third quarter 1998 results and would post a significant loss for the fourth quarter of 1998. Following JDAS' January 5, 1999 announcement, the investing public reacted strongly as the price of JDAS common stock plunged to $6 1/6 per share, more than 80% lower than the price at which defendants sold more than $140 million of JDAS stock. In addition, certain JDAS senior officers sold $43 million of their own JDAS stock while in possession of material non-public information about JDAS. What is more, JDAS itself issued and sold more than $90 million of stock via a public offering.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: JDAS
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: D. Arizona
DOCKET #: 99-CV-00065
JUDGE: Hon. Roger G. Strand
DATE FILED: 01/13/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/29/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/05/1999
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix)
    4041 N. Cental Avenue, Suite 1100, Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix), AZ 85012-3311
    602.274.1100 ·
  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
  3. Reinhardt, Wendorf & Blanchfield Attorneys at Law
    E-1000 First National Bank Building, 332 Minnesota Street, Reinhardt, Wendorf & Blanchfield Attorneys at Law, MN 55101
    800.465.1592 651.297.6543 · info@ralawfirm.com
  4. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Arizona
DOCKET #: 99-CV-00065
JUDGE: Hon. Roger G. Strand
DATE FILED: 07/23/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/01/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/30/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman, DeValerio & Pease LLP
    One Liberty Square, Berman, DeValerio & Pease LLP, MA 02109
    617.542.8300 ·
  2. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
  3. Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix)
    4041 N. Cental Avenue, Suite 1100, Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix), AZ 85012-3311
    602.274.1100 ·
  4. 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