Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 11/08/2002 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: November 02, 2001

According to the Company’s FORM 10-K For The Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2002, in late 2001, the company and certain of its officers and directors were named as defendants in four substantially identical securities class actions, which were consolidated (the "Consolidated Complaint") in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. By Opinion and Order dated November 8, 2002, the Court granted the defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated Complaint with prejudice. The plaintiffs have failed to timely appeal the Court's decision and therefore it is final.

The original Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing materially false and misleading statements to the market. Specifically,
throughout the Class Period, defendants made highly positive statements
regarding the Company's financial results, including strong sales and growth of its printers. Despite unprecedented competition in the industry, Lexmark seemed to be immune from market conditions, reporting quarter after quarter of strong financial growth. Unbeknownst to the investing public, Lexmark was plagued with an increasing backlog of unmarketable inventory which defendants failed to properly account for in Lexmark's publicly reported financial results, causing the Company's financial results to be overstated by at least $25 million during the Class Period. By failing to timely take a charge to earnings for the unmarketable inventory, defendants and other Lexmark insiders were able to divest themselves of thousands of Lexmark shares at prices well above $60 per share, generating proceeds of over $8,000,000.
On October 22, 2001, defendants finally revealed the truth, indicating that
Lexmark would record a $25 to $35 million inventory write-down in the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2001, and that Lexmark would have to undergo a major
restructuring in order to maintain its competitiveness. In addition, instead of
generating between 70-80 cents in earnings per share for the fourth quarter of
2001, a figure defendants repeatedly emphasized Lexmark would reach, defendants were forced to drastically revise its fourth quarter earnings' guidance. As revealed on October 22, 2001, defendants expected only 40-50 cents in earnings per share for the fourth quarter of 2001 - - a far cry from what analysts and the investing public were led to expect. In response to the unexpected news, Lexmark's stock declined by over 11% to close at $44.77 per share, on extraordinarily high trading volume.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Peripherals
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: LXK
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: E.D. Kentucky
DOCKET #: 01-CV-00485
JUDGE: Hon. Joseph M. Hood
DATE FILED: 11/02/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/20/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/22/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. Brian Felgoise
    230 South Broad Street, Suite 404 , Brian Felgoise, PA 19102
    215.735.6810 215/735.5185. ·
  3. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR)
    P.O. Box 25438, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR), AR 72221-5438
    501.312.8500 501.312.8505 ·
  4. Cauley, Geller, Bowman, Coates & Rudman LLP (San Diego, CA)
    225 Broadway, Suite 1900, Cauley, Geller, Bowman, Coates & Rudman LLP (San Diego, CA), CA 92010
    619.702.7350 619.702.7351 ·
  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 · Nfaruqi@faruqilaw.com
  6. 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
  7. Leo W. Desmond
    2161 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 204, Leo W. Desmond, FL 33409
    561.712.8000 561.712.8000 · stocklaw@bellsouth.net
  8. 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 ·
  9. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. Kentucky
DOCKET #: 01-CV-00485
JUDGE: Hon. Joseph M. Hood
DATE FILED: 06/03/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/20/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/22/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. Middleton & Reutlinger
    2500 Brown and Williamson Tower, Middleton & Reutlinger, KY 40202
    502584.1135 502.561.0442 ·
  3. 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 ·
No Document Title Filing Date