Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 05/29/2002 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: July 11, 2001

According to the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002, by a Final Order entered on May 29, 2002, a United States District Court Judge dismissed the consolidated amended complaint. The Final Order was accompanied by a Memorandum Opinion granting defendants' motion to dismiss the amended consolidated complaint for failure to state a claim. In the Memorandum Opinion, the Court found that the plaintiffs had not pleaded facts raising a strong inference that any disclosure challenged was made with fraudulent intent or was materially misleading or omissive.

As reported by the same SEC filing, four purported class action lawsuits were filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. One of the complaints was dismissed voluntarily. The remaining cases were consolidated and an amended consolidated complaint, which added as a defendant the Company's Executive Vice President of Marketing and Business Development and a director of the Company, was filed on December 17, 2001. On or about January 31, 2002, the defendants filed a motion to have the amended consolidated complaint dismissed with prejudice.

The original complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market between, April 24, 2001 through June 18, 2001 thereby artificially inflating the price of Trex securities.
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, the Company repeatedly issued press releases highlighting the Company's strong sales revenue growth and earnings growth. These statements were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose that (1) the company had shipped to their customers product in quantities far in excess of the actual demand which resulted in inventory build-up at its customers; and (2) the excess inventory at the customer level resulted in the company not reasonably believing it could achieve $81 million in first half revenues for 2001 . Finally, on June 18, 2001, the company revealed that because of its excess inventories at the customers, it had experienced substantially reduced sales in April and May and that Trex expected to achieve only $66 to $68 million in revenues for the first half of 2001. As a result of this disclosure, Trex's stock price fell $7.98 to close at $18.50 on June 19, with over 1.3 million shares traded.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Fabricated Plastic & Rubber
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: TWP
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: W.D. Virginia
DOCKET #: 01-CV-00517
JUDGE: Hon. Samuel G. Wilson
DATE FILED: 07/11/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/24/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/18/2001
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. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: W.D. Virginia
DOCKET #: 01-CV-00517
JUDGE: Hon. Samuel G. Wilson
DATE FILED: 12/17/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/24/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/18/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP (Boca Raton)
    197 South Federal Highway, Suite 200, Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33432
    ·
  3. Kenneth A. Elan (former NY)
    217 Broadway Suite 404, Kenneth A. Elan (former NY), NY 10007
    212.619.0260 ·
  4. 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 · bmgross@bernardmgross.com
  5. 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
  6. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (Boca Raton)
    The Plaza, Suite 900, 5355 Town Center Road, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33486
    561.361.5000 ·
  7. Savett Frutkin Podell & Ryan, P.C.

    800.993.3233 · sfprpc@op.net
No Document Title Filing Date