Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 02/11/2004 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: November 28, 2000

According to the latest docket, on April 7, 2005, the Court entered the Judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff Tracinda Corporation, and the case was closed. The Plaintiff Tracinda Corporation filed a Notice of Appeal and the defendants responded by filing a Notice of Cross Appeal. The appeal is currently pending in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

As reported by the Company’s FORM 20-F For The Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2003, in August 2003, DaimlerChrysler agreed to settle the consolidated class action case for $300 million (approximately [EURO]240 million adjusted for currency effects), and shortly thereafter, DaimlerChrysler concluded a settlement with Glickenhaus, one of the two individual plaintiffs. On February 5, 2004, the Court issued a final order approving the settlement of the consolidated class action case and ordering its dismissal. The settlements did not affect the case brought by Tracinda, which claims to have suffered damages in the range of $856 million to $1.28 billion. In November 2003, the Court denied the remaining aspects of defendants' motion for summary judgment. The Tracinda case went to trial in December 2003 and continued for approximately two weeks. Trial of the case was suspended with approximately two days of trial time remaining while the parties addressed a discovery issue in a separate hearing. The trial reconvened on February 9, 2004, and was completed February 11, 2004.

As summarized by the same SEC filing, in the fourth quarter of 2000, Tracinda Corporation filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against DaimlerChrysler AG and some of the members of its Supervisory Board and Board of Management (Messrs. Kopper, Prof. Schrempp and Dr. Gentz). Shortly thereafter, other plaintiffs filed a number of actions against the same defendants, making claims similar to those in the Tracinda complaint. Two individual lawsuits and one consolidated class action lawsuit were originally pending. The plaintiffs, current or former DaimlerChrysler shareholders, alleged that the defendants violated U.S. securities law and committed fraud in obtaining approval from Chrysler stockholders of the business combination between Chrysler and Daimler-Benz in 1998. The consolidated class action complaint contained additional allegations that were later dismissed. In March 2003, the Court granted Mr. Kopper's motion to dismiss each of the complaints against him on the ground that the Court lacked jurisdiction over him. In February 2003, the DaimlerChrysler defendants filed motions seeking summary judgment on all claims in the cases on several grounds, including that the claims are barred by the statute of limitations. In June 2003, the Court denied defendants' motion relating to the statute of limitations.

The original complaint charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b), 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rules 10b-5 and 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, and Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, for materially false representations of fact contained in statements to the public, and documents filed with the SEC, in connection with DaimlerChrysler's procurement of the necessary shareholder approval for the Merger. Specifically, as alleged in the complaint, defendants issued numerous statements assuring the markets that the Merger would be a Merger of Equals, when in fact, defendants had intended to turn Chrysler into a division of DaimlerChrysler. Since the Merger, DaimlerChrysler has replaced numerous high-ranking executives of Chrysler with those of DaimlerChrysler. The shareholders who exchanged their Chrysler shares for those of DaimlerChrysler have seen the stock price of DaimlerChrysler drop dramatically since the Merger.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Auto & Truck Manufacturers
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: DCX
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: D. Delaware
DOCKET #: 00-CV-993
JUDGE: Hon. Joseph J. Farnan Jr.
DATE FILED: 11/28/2000
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/06/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/04/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky (New York, 42 Street)
    60 East 42 Street, Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky (New York, 42 Street), NY 10021
    212.687.6655 ·
  2. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 · investorprotect@bm.net
  3. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (former San Diego)
    12544 High Bluff Drive, Suite 150, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (former San Diego), CA 92130
    858.793.0070 858.793.0323 · blbg@blbglaw.com
  4. Entwistle & Cappucci LLP
    299 Park Avenue, 14th Floor, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, NY 10171
    212.894.7200 212.894.7272 · info@entwistle-law.com
  5. Law Firm of Harvey Greenfield (New York)
    60 East 42nd Street, Law Firm of Harvey Greenfield (New York), NY 10165
    212.949.5500 ·
  6. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA)
    600 West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA), CA 92101
    800.449.4900 · support@milberg.com
  7. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
  8. Rosenthal, Monhait, Gross & Goddess, P.A.
    Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center, PO Box 1070, Rosenthal, Monhait, Gross & Goddess, P.A., DE 19899-0170
    302.656.4433 (302) 658-7567 ·
  9. 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
COURT: D. Delaware
DOCKET #: 00-CV-993
JUDGE: Hon. Joseph J. Farnan Jr.
DATE FILED: 05/14/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 11/13/1998
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/17/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Barrack, Rodos & Bacine (Main office, Philadelphia)
    Two Commerce Square, 2001 Market Street, Suite 3300 , Barrack, Rodos & Bacine (Main office, Philadelphia), PA 19103
    215.963.0600 215.963.0838 · info@barrack.com
  2. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New York, NY)
    1285 Avenue of the Americas, 33rd Floor, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New York, NY), NY 10019
    212.554.1400 212.554.1444 · blbg@blbglaw.com
  3. Chimicles & Tikellis LLP (Haverford)
    361 West Lancaster Avenue, Chimicles & Tikellis LLP (Haverford), PA 19041
    888.805.7848 610.649.3633 · mail@chimicles.com
  4. Entwistle & Cappucci LLP
    299 Park Avenue, 14th Floor, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, NY 10171
    212.894.7200 212.894.7272 · info@entwistle-law.com
  5. Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington)
    1201 N. Market Street, Suite 2100, Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington), DE 19801
    302.622.7000 302.622.7100 · lawyers@gelaw.com
  6. Rosenthal, Monhait, Gross & Goddess, P.A.
    Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center, PO Box 1070, Rosenthal, Monhait, Gross & Goddess, P.A., DE 19899-0170
    302.656.4433 (302) 658-7567 ·
No Document Title Filing Date