Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 11/01/1999 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: August 19, 1998

According to the docket posted, on November 1, 1999, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment signed by U.S. District Judge Jorge A. Solis adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendations dismissing the amended class action complaint with prejudice.

Previously, on January 27, 1999, the Court entered the Order granting the motion for appointment of lead plaintiffs and approval of co-lead counsel. On February 26, 1999, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the class action complaint, but on March 31, 1999, the plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. On May 4, 1999, the defendants again filed a motion to dismiss the amended class action complaint. On July 30, 1999, Magistrate Judge Jeff Kaplan issued the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations that the motion to dismiss the amended class action complaint should be granted in its entirety and this case should be dismissed with prejudice.

The original Complaint charges that Gadzooks and certain officers and directors of the company during the relevant time period violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by, among other things, misrepresenting
and failing to disclose material information concerning the company's "to date"
July sales figures, information that would have undermined its July 9, 1998
press release and statements contained therein regarding its profitability and
inventory composition and positioning.

The Complaint alleges that by July 9, 1998, defendants had actual knowledge
of the negative, underlying material facts indicating that sales for the first
nine days of July were below expectations, that the company's inventory and
products were not being adequately accepted in the marketplace, that the sales
trend was highly negative, that the overall and budgeted sales for July, one of
the "most important profit months of the second quarter" were at risk and would
be well below expectations, and that, as a result, profitability would suffer
substantially. The scheme (i) deceived the investing public regarding
Gadzooks' business, its finances and the intrinsic value of Gadzooks' common
stock; and (ii) caused plaintiff and other members of the Class to purchase the
company's common stock at artificially inflated prices.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

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

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: GADZ
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. Texas
DOCKET #: 98-CV-01959
JUDGE: Hon. Jorge A. Solis
DATE FILED: 08/19/1998
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/09/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/22/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) (former)
    320 East 39th Street, Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) (former), NY 10016
    212.983.9330 212.983.9331 · Nfaruqi@faruqilaw.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
  3. Seeger Weiss LLP (New York Old Address)
    40 Wall Street. The Trump Building, Seeger Weiss LLP (New York Old Address), NY 10005
    212.584.0700 · info@seegerweiss.com
  4. 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: N.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 98-CV-01959
JUDGE: Hon. Jorge A. Solis
DATE FILED: 03/31/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/09/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/22/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Beatie & Osborne LLP
    599 Lexington Avenue, 42nd Floor, Beatie & Osborne LLP, NY 10022
    212.888.9000 212.888.9664 ·
  2. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) (former)
    320 East 39th Street, Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) (former), NY 10016
    212.983.9330 212.983.9331 · Nfaruqi@faruqilaw.com
  3. Jeffrey S. Abraham (New York)
    60 East 42nd St - Suite 4700, Jeffrey S. Abraham (New York), NY 10165
    212.692.0555 ·
  4. Kilgore & Kilgore
    3131 McKinney Ave., LB 103, Ste. 700, Kilgore & Kilgore , TX 75204-2471
    214.969.9090 214.953.0130 · dcm@kilgorelaw.com
  5. 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
  6. Seeger Weiss LLP (New York Old Address)
    40 Wall Street. The Trump Building, Seeger Weiss LLP (New York Old Address), NY 10005
    212.584.0700 · info@seegerweiss.com
  7. 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