Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 05/08/2003 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: November 30, 1998

According to the docket, on May 8, 2003, the court entered the Order approving the settlement and granted the motion for an award of attorneys’ fees in the amount of $840,000 and reimbursement of expenses in the $120,980.94 to plaintiffs' counsel. The Court further entered the Final Order dismissing the complaint and the case was closed.

Earlier, on July 25, 2000, the Court entered the Order dismissing/closing the case for statistical purposes, placed the matter in the civil suspense file, and the case was closed. On February 4, 2003, Stipulation of Settlement was filed, and on February 22, 2003, the Court entered the Order granting the motion to re-open the case and the case was removed from the civil suspense file.

On March 11, 1999, the Court entered the Order signed by U.S. District Judge Federico A. Moreno granting the motions to consolidate the cases, for appointment as lead plaintiffs, and for approval of proposed lead plaintiffs’ selection/appointment of lead counsel. Certain cases were dismissed without prejudice and with leave to file an amended consolidated complaint in 99-CV-225.

The original Complaint alleges that Let's Talk Cellular and certain of its officers
violated Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
According to the Complaint, during the Class Period defendants artificially
inflated the price of Let's Talk Cellular common stock by disseminating
materially false and misleading statements, and omitting to state material
facts, regarding wholesale and retail revenues as well as integration costs
related to acquired companies. The complaint alleges that, among other things,
defendants omitted to disclose that: (i) Let's Talk Cellular had been
experiencing a material softness in retail and wholesale sales; (ii) sales were
being adversely impacted by undisclosed changes in Let's Talk Cellular's
incentive pay system; and (iii) Let's Talk Cellular was incurring material
additional costs due to delays in the integration of acquired companies. The
Complaint also alleges that during the Class Period, while the price of Let's
Talk Cellular common stock was artificially inflated by defendants' materially
misleading statements and omissions, that each of the two named defendants sold
87,000 shares of Let's Talk Cellular common stock for gross proceeds exceeding
$1.2 million.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Retail (Specialty)
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: LTCWE
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: S.D. Florida
DOCKET #: 98-CV-2932
JUDGE: Hon. Federico A. Moreno
DATE FILED: 11/30/1998
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/11/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/02/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  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
  3. Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian & Feffer, LLP
    488 Madison Avenue, Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian & Feffer, LLP, NY
    212.935.7400 10022 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. Florida
DOCKET #: 99-CV-225
JUDGE: Hon. Federico A. Moreno
DATE FILED: 03/31/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/25/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/02/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Geller Rudman, PLLC.
    197 South Federal Highway, Suite 200, Geller Rudman, PLLC., FL 33432
    561.750.3000 888.262.3131 · info@geller-rudman.com
  2. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (Boca Raton)
    5355 Town Center Road, Suite 900, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33486
    561.361.5000 561.367.8400 · info@milbergweiss.com
  3. 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
  4. Vianale & Vianale LLP (former Boca Raton)
    The Plaza - Suite 801, 5355 Town Center Road., Vianale & Vianale LLP (former Boca Raton), FL 33486
    561.391.4900 561.368.9274 · info@vianalelaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date