On or around 08/12/1998 (Other)
Filing Date: February 18, 1998
According to the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 1998, after reviewing the Company's motions to dismiss and for the imposition of sanctions, the plaintiffs have decided to dismiss the case in its entirety and with prejudice. The Company and the other defendants have agreed that they will accept dismissal of the case with prejudice and will not seek the imposition of sanctions against the plaintiffs or their attorneys. An order of dismissal was signed August 10, 1998 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
The original complaint alleges that Precision Response and certain of its officers and directors and the lead underwriters of its secondary public offering violated the Securities Act of 1933 by omitting to state material facts necessary to make the statements contained in the Prospectus not misleading. In particular, it is alleged that defendants omitted the financial results for the three months ended Dec. 31, 1996 that revealed a slowing in the company's growth rate and omitted to disclose the existence of a cost cutting program that had been initiated prior to the offering by the company's largest client and main source of revenue, a program that was virtually certain to have a material negative impact on revenue.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: Precision Response Corporation
Industry: Business Services
Headquarters: United States
Ticker Symbol: PRRC
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.
First Identified Complaint
Nathan S. Davis, et al. v. Precision Response Corporation, et al.