Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 11/20/2001 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: November 10, 1999

According to the docket, on September 6, 2001, the Court entered the Order by U.S. District Judge Benson E. Legg certifying the action as a class action for persons/purchasers of Common Stock of IC Isaacs. On November 20, 2001, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment approving the Settlement Agreement as fair, reasonable, and adequate and dismissing the Complaint with Prejudice and without costs except as provided in the Stipulation. Further, the Plan of Allocation was approved as fair and reasonable, and Plaintiffs' counsel were awarded the sum of $275,000 as and for their attorneys' fees and in reimbursement of expenses. The case is closed. According to the Notice of Settlement posted, the Settlement Fund established was in the amount of $625, 000.

As reported in the Company's Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2001, on June 19, 2001, the Company reached a tentative agreement to settle the consolidated class action lawsuit.

The original complaint alleges that Isaacs and certain officers and directors of Isaacs during the Class Period violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing materially false and misleading statements in connection with Isaacs' initial public offering on December 17, 1997 regarding the products, business operations and prospects of Isaacs.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's initial public offering, completed in December 1997, contained materially false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's products, business operations and prospects and that the Company issued a series of materially false and misleading statements, which artificially inflated the price of the Company's common stock during the class period. Specifically, it alleges violations of Sections 11,12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors. The plaintiffs seek recession, damages, costs expenses, including attorneys' fees and experts' fees, and such other relief as may be just and proper. The Company believes that the allegations set forth in the complaint are without merit and intends to vigorously contest the allegations contained therein.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Consumer Cyclical
Industry: Apparel/Accessories
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ISAC
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: D. Maryland
DOCKET #: 99-CV-3418
JUDGE: Hon. J. F. Motz
DATE FILED: 11/10/1999
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/17/1997
CLASS PERIOD END: 11/11/1998
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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 ·
  2. 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. Maryland
DOCKET #: 99-CV-3418
JUDGE: Hon. J. F. Motz
DATE FILED: 05/12/2000
CLASS PERIOD START:
CLASS PERIOD END:
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. 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 ·
  3. 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
  4. Tydings & Rosenberg LLP
    100 East Pratt Street, Tydings & Rosenberg LLP, MD 21202
    410.752.9700 410.757.5460 · webmaster@tydingslaw.com
  5. 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