Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 03/12/2004 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: June 04, 2001

According to the docket, on March 12, 2004, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order by U.S. District Judge Shirley Wohl Kram. The Court later entered the Order granting the motion to authorize the distribution of the settlement fund.

The Notice of Settlement posted states that the proposed settlement was in the amount of $1,300,000 in cash. As outlined in the Notice, a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) was filed on November 2, 2001. It asserted claims against Emex and the Individual Defendants (as defined below) for alleged violations of the federal securities laws, specifically §§ 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The Amended Complaint added Individual defendants, Stanson & Iannazzo (“S&I”), Universal Equities Consolidated, LLC (“Universal”) and Thorn Tree Resources LLC (“Thorn Tree”). Defendants moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint, and on September 17, 2002, the Court denied the motion with respect to claims asserted against Emex and certain Individual Defendants, but granted the motion for claims asserted against S&I, Universal and Thorn Tree.

Immediately following the decision on the motion to dismiss, Lead Plaintiffs issued comprehensive discovery requests to Emex and each of the Individual Defendants. Lead Plaintiffs also served subpoenas on several third parties involved in the financing efforts. Pursuant to these discovery requests, Lead Plaintiffs obtained, reviewed, and analyzed several thousand pages of documents essential to understanding the claims at issue, including notes of key meetings related to the financing efforts. Lead Plaintiffs also filed a motion seeking certification of the Class.

On December 31, 2002, Emex filed a petition for liquidation under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code.

The complaint charges the defendants with having issued a false and misleading press release concerning its successful attempt to secure much-needed financing. In particular, on April 9, 2001, the Company announced that it had obtained $100 million in project financing to build the first of a series of its highly-touted commercial plants. The Company credited the success of the deal to ``the efforts of Credit Suisse First Boston,'' a prestigious Wall Street investment firm. In reaction to the news, the price of Emex common stock soared 13% on April 10, 2001. On May 23, 2001, Dow Jones Newswires broke the news that, in fact, Credit Suisse First Boston (``CSFB'') was not involved in securing Emex's financing. According to the May 23rd article, a spokesperson for CSFB stated that CSFB turned down Emex's financing proposal. On May 30, 2001, Emex issued another press release in which it revealed that Fieldstone, Inc., not CSFB, was the financial institution behind the $100 million financing.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil Well Services & Equipment
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: EMEX
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 01-CV-4886
JUDGE: Hon. Shirley W. Kram
DATE FILED: 06/04/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/09/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/23/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Beatie & Osborne LLP
    599 Lexington Avenue, 42nd Floor, Beatie & Osborne LLP, NY 10022
    212.888.9000 212.888.9664 ·
  2. 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
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 01-CV-4886
JUDGE: Hon. Shirley W. Kram
DATE FILED: 11/05/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/09/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/23/2001
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. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
No Document Title Filing Date