Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 04/25/2006 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: June 13, 1996

On April 24, 2006, the Court held a Final Settlement Fairness Hearing and that same day Judge Frank Zapata signed an Order and Final Judgment approving the settlement and awarding attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of litigation expenses.

As summarized by the Notice of Proposed Settlement, on September 22, 2005, parties submitted various Motions in limine seeking evidentiary rulings in advance of trial. On December 5, 2005, the Court heard oral argument on the Motions in limine and entered its order denying substantially all of Defendants’ Motions in limine on December 7, 2005. On December 8, 2005, this matter was mediated before the Honorable Nicholas Politan, United States District Judge, District of New Jersey, Retired. On December 20, 2005, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding setting forth the basic terms of the Settlement of this Action. On January 26, 2006, the parties executed the Stipulation of Settlement.

On September 23, 1996, Defendants moved to dismiss the original complaint. Plaintiff filed a Memorandum in Opposition to the Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss on November 8, 1996. The Court did not rule on the Motion. On February 21, 2001, Plaintiff filed a Second (Corrected) Amended Complaint (“Complaint”). On March 9, 2001, the Defendants again moved to dismiss the Complaint and on March 22, 2001, Plaintiff filed a Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. On June 26, 2001, the Court heard argument on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. On March 29, 2002, the Court denied Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Counts I through IV. Count V relating to breach of fiduciary duty under Arizona law was dismissed. On April 29, 2002, Lead Plaintiff served document requests and commenced discovery. Lead Plaintiff moved for class certification on May 30, 2002. The Court certified this action as a class action on October 3, 2002. On October 27, 2003, the parties filed Motions for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff moved for Summary Judgment as to Count I on liability only. Defendants moved for Summary Judgment on all Counts. On August 11, 2005, the Court denied all pending Motions for Summary Judgment and shortly thereafter set this matter for trial beginning on January 9, 2006.

The class action was filed on behalf of all persons who tendered their warrants to acquire Magma Copper Co. ("Magma") common stock at an exercise price of $8.25, expiration Nov. 30, 1995, pursuant to the May 1995 self-tender offer by Magma (the "Class"). The Complaint names as Defendants BHP Copper Inc., the successor to Magma, and BHP Sub Inc. and Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd., the successors in interest to Magma, as well as certain controlling shareholders and officers and directors of Magma. This action arises out of a self-tender offer by Magma for all of the outstanding listed common stock warrants, $8.50 exercise price of Magma (the "Magma Warrants") at a price of $8.25 per warrant. The self-tender commenced on or about May 16, 1995 and was concluded at midnight June 14, 1995. The Complaint charges the Defendants with violations of the federal securities laws (Sections 10(b), 13(e) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) and breach of fiduciary duty and alleges, among other things, that the Warrant Tender Offer contained untrue statements of material fact and/or omitted material facts regarding the fairness of the tender offer.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Metal Mining
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol:
Company Market:
Market Status:

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 #: 96-CV-390
JUDGE: Hon. William D. Browning
DATE FILED: 06/13/1996
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/16/1995
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/14/1995
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (FL)
    515 North Flagler Drive - Suite 1701, Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (FL), FL 33401
    561.835.9400 ·
  2. Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix)
    4041 N. Cental Avenue, Suite 1100, Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix), AZ 85012-3311
    602.274.1100 ·
  3. Burt & Pucillo LLP
    515 North Flagler Drive, Northbridge Centre, Suite 1701, Burt & Pucillo LLP, FL 33401
    800.349.4612 ·
  4. Ryan, Wochok, Ryan & Reed, Ltd.
    13 Paoli Ct , Ryan, Wochok, Ryan & Reed, Ltd., PA 19301
    610.296.9900 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Arizona
DOCKET #: 96-CV-390
JUDGE: Hon. William D. Browning
DATE FILED: 02/22/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/16/1995
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/14/1995
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (FL)
    515 North Flagler Drive - Suite 1701, Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (FL), FL 33401
    561.835.9400 ·
  2. Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix)
    4041 N. Cental Avenue, Suite 1100, Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, PC (Phoenix), AZ 85012-3311
    602.274.1100 ·
  3. Burt & Pucillo LLP
    515 North Flagler Drive, Northbridge Centre, Suite 1701, Burt & Pucillo LLP, FL 33401
    800.349.4612 ·
  4. Ryan, Wochok, Ryan & Reed, Ltd.
    13 Paoli Ct , Ryan, Wochok, Ryan & Reed, Ltd., PA 19301
    610.296.9900 ·
No Document Title Filing Date