Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 07/16/2002 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: September 01, 2000

According to the Company’s FORM 10-K For The Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2002, the Court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss the Second Complaint, with prejudice, on July 16, 2002. Pursuant to the Court's dismissal order, all defendants were dismissed and a judgment was entered in favor of the defendants. The plaintiffs did not appeal the Court's decision, so the Court's dismissal order is final and non-appealable, and the plaintiffs can neither further amend their complaint nor submit a new complaint in connection with the above-referenced restatements.

As summarized by the same SEC filing, during fiscal 2001, five complaints in putative class action lawsuits were consolidated into a single class action styled In re DT Industries, Inc. Securities Litigation and an amended complaint was filed (the "Securities Action") adding the Company’s Sencorp subsidiary and certain additional officers and directors as defendants. As of the end of fiscal 2002, the Securities Action was pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri (the "Court"). The Consolidated Amended Complaint asserted causes of action under Section 10(b), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and alleged, among other things, that the accounting adjustments caused the Company’s previously issued financial statements to be materially false and misleading. The Consolidated Amended Complaint also sought damages in an unspecified amount and was purported to be brought on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s common stock during various periods, all of which fall between September 29, 1997 and August 23, 2000. On October 4, 2001, the Court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss the Securities Action, without prejudice. Pursuant to the Court's dismissal order, all defendants were dismissed, but the plaintiffs were granted the right to amend their complaint. The plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint on January 25, 2002 (the "Second Complaint"), thereby reviving the Securities Action. On March 11, 2002, DTI and the other defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Second Complaint.

The original action seeks damages for violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all investors who purchased DTI common stock between September 29, 1997 and August 23, 2000 (the “Class Period”). The complaint alleges DTI and certain of its current and former officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On August 23, 2000, DTI disclosed that its independent auditors had requested additional time in order to continue its investigation into overstatements of certain asset accounts at DTI’s wholly-owned subsidiary Kalish, Inc. The Company further advised that “the discrepancies are likely to be material and could impact previously reported earnings for the 1997, 1998 and 1999 fiscal years, and for the fiscal quarters during those years and during fiscal year 2000.” In addition, the Company stated that it had placed the senior financial officer of Kalish on administrative leave and had accepted the resignation of the Senior Vice President of Finance and Administration of DTI. As a result of these revelations, NASDAQ halted trading in DTI stock.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Capital Goods
Industry: Misc. Capital Goods
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: DTII
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: W.D. Missouri
DOCKET #: 00-CV-03369
JUDGE: Hon. Dean Whipple
DATE FILED: 09/01/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/29/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/23/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (MA)
    One Liberty Square, Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (MA), MA 2109
    617.542.8300 617.230.0903 · info@bermanesq.com
  2. Cauley, Geller, Bowman, Coates & Rudman LLP (San Diego, CA)
    225 Broadway, Suite 1900, Cauley, Geller, Bowman, Coates & Rudman LLP (San Diego, CA), CA 92010
    619.702.7350 619.702.7351 ·
  3. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  4. Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego)
    1818 Market Street, Suite 2500, Spector Roseman & Kodroff (San Diego), PA 19103
    215.496.0300 215.496.6611 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: W.D. Missouri
DOCKET #: 00-CV-03369
JUDGE: Hon. Dean Whipple
DATE FILED: 01/25/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 09/29/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/23/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 · investorprotect@bm.net
  2. Berman, DeValerio & Pease LLP
    One Liberty Square, Berman, DeValerio & Pease LLP, MA 02109
    617.542.8300 ·
  3. Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania)
    11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Brodsky & Smith, LLC (former Pennysylvania), PA 19004
    610.668.7987 610.660.0450 · esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com
  4. Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates (Boca Raton, FL)
    2255 Glades Road Suite 421A, Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates (Boca Raton, FL), FL 33431
    561.750.3000 ·
  5. Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy
    265 Llwyds Lane, Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy, FL 32963
    561.231.4202 ·
  6. 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
  7. Mark McNair
    1919 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 800, Mark McNair , DC 20006
    703.273.3070 · wmmcnair@justice4investors.com
  8. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  9. Weinstein, Kitchenoff, Scarlato & Goldman
    1608 Walnut Street, Suite 1400, Weinstein, Kitchenoff, Scarlato & Goldman, PA 19103
    215.545.7200 215.545.6535 · info@wksg.com
  10. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York)
    270 Madison Avenue, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.545.4600 212.686.0114 · newyork@whafh.com
No Document Title Filing Date