Case Page


Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 07/14/2006 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: October 26, 2000

According to an article dated March 4, 2008, the district court approved the settlement on July 12, 2006, as reasonable considering the uncertain outcome and legal and factual questions (Sutton v. Bernard, 446 F.Supp.2d 814). The court held attorneys' fees would be awarded from the net settlement after expenses -- the net being $17,360,491.44. The district court, using the "degree of success" test, determined a fee of 15 percent of the net settlement, or $2,605,000, would be awarded, citing Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 436, 103 S.Ct. 1933, 76 L.Ed.2d 40 (1983), and relying upon the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C. [sec] 78u-4(a)(6) (2007), as authority. The plaintiffs' counsel appealed. … Concluding the district court abused its discretion, [7th Circuit Judge Ann Claire] Williams stated: "A review of the shortcomings in the district court's methodology leads us to conclude that the court abused its discretion in awarding Counsel's fee percentage. The district court erroneously concluded that its fee determination was controlled by the `degree of success' achieved for the class. In addition, it did not factor into its assessment the value that the market would have placed on Counsel's legal services had its fee been arranged at the outset. Because the district court's fee award of 15 percent of the common fund is based on an erroneous conclusion of law, it must be vacated." The court vacated the district court's judgment and remanded for further proceedings.

According to the Order and Final Judgment signed by U.S. District Judge John F. Grady on July 12, 2006, the settlement is approved and the complaint is dismissed with prejudice and without costs, except as provided in the Stipulation. The Plan of Allocation is also approved, and Plaintiffs’ Counsel is awarded 15% of the Net Settlement Fund, or the sum of $2,605,000 in fees, and $639,508.56 in reimbursement of expenses.

By the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action dated January 24, 2005, a Settlement Fund consisting of $18,000,000 in cash, plus interest, has been established. A hearing will be held on April 6, 2005, to determine whether a proposed settlement as set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated December 15, 2004, is fair, reasonable and adequate and to consider the proposed Plan of Allocation for the Settlement proceeds and the application of Plaintiffs’ Counsel for attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses.

As summarized by the same Notice, by the order dated February 7, 2001 the Honorable John F. Grady, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, consolidated the actions and appointed Lead Plaintiffs and Lead Plaintiffs’ Counsel. On May 3, 2001, the Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Complaint”), on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired the securities of marchFIRST during the period commencing March 23, 2000 through November 20, 2000 (the “Class Period”) against Robert F. Bernard, Robert T. Clarkson, and Bert B. Young (the “Defendants”). Due to its bankruptcy, marchFIRST was not named as a defendant in the Complaint. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on June 15, 2002. On August 6, 2001, Judge Grady denied the motion o dismiss and directed the Defendants to file an answer to the Complaint by August 28, 2001. On September 4, 2001 Lead Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Class Certification. Following extensive discovery and briefing on class certification, Judge Grady certified the class by Order dated December 17, 2001. The first of several discovery requests were served by Lead Plaintiffs on September 6, 2001. Discovery has been on-going and extensive. Lead Plaintiffs have requested, received, and reviewed hundreds of boxes of documents. In addition to this Action, other litigation was brought against the Defendants. The bankruptcy Trustee for the estate of marchFIRST instituted adversary proceedings in the bankruptcy court against the Defendants herein and other former officers and directors of marchFIRST.

The original class action lawsuit commenced charging marchFIRST and its chief executive officer with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5. The complaint alleges that Defendants made a series of materially false and misleading statements in: press releases, statements to stock analysts, and SEC filings. The misrepresentations concerned: the Company's second quarter 2000 financial results; its improving business momentum, its ability to meet analyst expectations for third quarter performance, and the quality of its accounts receivables. As a result, marchFIRST's stock price was artificially inflated throughout the Class Period.

NOTE: On April 12, 2001, the Company filed for relief under Chapter 1 I of the Federal Bankruptcy Code. For this reason, marchFIRST has not been included as a named defendant in the consolidated complaint.


Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Services
Headquarters: United States


Ticker Symbol: MRCH
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. Illinois
DOCKET #: 00-CV-06676
JUDGE: Hon. John F. Grady
DATE FILED: 10/26/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/23/2000
  1. Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll PLLC (Seattle WA)
    701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6860, Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll PLLC (Seattle WA), WA 98014
    206.521.0080 206.521.0166 ·
  2. Kenneth A. Elan (Chicago )
    30 North LaSalle Street, Suite 3200, Kenneth A. Elan (Chicago ), IL 60602
    312782.4880 ·
  3. Leo W. Desmond
    2161 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 204, Leo W. Desmond, FL 33409
    561.712.8000 561.712.8000 ·
  4. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY), NY 10119-1065
    212.594.5300 ·
  5. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. Illinois
DOCKET #: 00-CV-06676
JUDGE: Hon. John F. Grady
DATE FILED: 05/03/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/20/2000
  1. Abbey Gardy & Squiteri LLP (San Francisco)
    595 Market Street, Suite 2500, Abbey Gardy & Squiteri LLP (San Francisco), CA 94105
    415.538.3725 ·
  2. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 ·
  3. Cauley & Geller (Boca Raton)
    2255 Glades Road, #421A, Cauley & Geller (Boca Raton), FL 33431
    561.750.3000 ·
  4. Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. (Washington, DC)
    1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 500, West Tower, Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. (Washington, DC), DC 20005
    202.408.4600 202.408.4699 ·
  5. Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) (former)
    320 East 39th Street, Faruqi & Faruqi LLP (New York) (former), NY 10016
    212.983.9330 212.983.9331 ·
  6. Fine, Kaplan and Black
    1845 Walnut Street-Suite 2300, Fine, Kaplan and Black, PA 19103
    215/567.6565 ·
  7. Futterman & Howard Chartered
    122 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 1850, Futterman & Howard Chartered, IL 60603
    312.427.3600 312.427-1850 ·
  8. Holzer & Holzer, LLC
    1117 Perimeter Center West, Suite E-107, Holzer & Holzer, LLC, GA 30338
    770.392.0090 770.392-0029 ·
  9. Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia) (former)
    1515 Locust Street, 2nd Floor, Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross (Philadelphia) (former), PA 19102
    215-561-3600 215-561-3000 ·
  10. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), NY 10119
    212.594.5300 212.868.1229 ·
  11. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY), NY 10119-1065
    212.594.5300 ·
  12. Miller Faucher and Cafferty LLP
    30 North LaSalle Street, Miller Faucher and Cafferty LLP, IL 60602
    312.782.4880 ·
  13. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 ·
  14. Spector, Roseman & Kodroff (Philadelphia)
    1818 Market Street; Suite 2500, Spector, Roseman & Kodroff (Philadelphia), PA 19103
    215.496.0300 215.496.6610 ·
  15. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
    6 East 45th Street, Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), NY 10017
    310.209.2468 310.209.2087 ·
  16. Weiss & Yourman (New York, NY)
    The French Building, 551 Fifth Ave., Suite 1600, Weiss & Yourman (New York, NY), NY 10126
    212.682.3025 212.682.3010 ·
  17. 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 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date