Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 01/03/2001 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: May 03, 2000

According to the docket posted, on December 29, 2000, the Court entered the Memorandum Decision signed by U.S. District Judge Denny Chin granting the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaints in action #00cv3364 and action #00cv3849, with prejudice as to the federal claims and without prejudice as to the state law claims. On January 3, 2001, the Court entered Judgment, and the case was closed.

The complaint alleges that Dow violated federal securities laws, including Section 13(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, in an SEC filing on August 13, 1999 that contained false statements and omissions concerning potential liabilities and dangers of business disruption to which Dow would be exposed upon its acquisition by merger of Union Carbide. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Dow failed to disclose that Union Carbide is exposed to potential liabilities from its former pesticide plant in Bhopal, India that (i) released poisonous gas in 1984 that killed thousands and injured half a million people, and (ii) continues to cause environmental contamination in a densely populated region. The complaint alleges that Dow failed to disclose that: (i) Union Carbide is criminally charged in India for the Bhopal Disaster with culpable homicide and other charges, which expose it to potentially billions of dollars of liability; (ii) Union Carbide failed to appear in Indian criminal courts, was proclaimed an absconder and its assets in India were attached; (iii) Dow's Indian holdings will likewise be in danger of attachement by Indian courts; (iv) Dow's plans to expand operations in India will, therefore, be jeopardized; and (v) Union Carbide remains liable for damages from environmental contamination from its former Bhopal pesticide plant. The complaint further alleges that Dow's failure to address these matters has caused: (i) Dow to understimate the liabilities it stands to assume pursuant to the merger, and (ii) that Dow made an excessive offer for Union Carbide.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Chemical Manufacturing
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: DOW
Company Market: New York SE
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. New York
DOCKET #: 00-CV-03364
JUDGE: Hon. Denny Chin
DATE FILED: 05/03/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/13/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/03/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Curtis V. Trinko LLP
    16 West 46th Street 7th Floor, Curtis V. Trinko LLP, NY 10036
    212.490.9550 212.986.0158 · ctrinko@trinko.com
  2. Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP
    100 Park Avenue, Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, NY 10017
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@glrslaw.com
  3. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
    World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A., MD 21202
    410.332.0030 · pivenlaw@erols.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
No Document Title Filing Date