Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 07/22/2005 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: May 04, 2002

As summarized by the docket, on May 10, 2005, the Court entered the Preliminary Approval Order regarding a settlement with the remaining, individual defendants. According to the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action dated May 23, 2005, the settlement fund was in the amount of $25.25 million. On July 22, 2005, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment signed by U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow.

On July 15, 2002, the Court entered the Order by Judge Arthur J. Tarnow granting the motion to appoint lead plaintiff, appointing Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A. as lead counsel and appointing Jaffe Raitt as local counsel. In September, October and November 2002, the various defendants filed motions to dismiss the plaintiffs' amended class action complaint. On July 23, 2003, the Court entered the Order granting in part and denying in part certain motions to dismiss. The Court granted the motion to dismiss by CIBC World Market Corporation and Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation. On August 8, 2003, the Court entered Judgment for CIBC World Market Corporation and Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation and against the plaintiffs. On December 23, 2003, a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement was filed regarding defendants Horst Kukwa-Lemmerz and Wienand Meilicke. On April 26, 2004, the Court entered the Order dismissing with prejudice and without costs defendants Horst Kukwa-Lemmerz and Wienand Meilicke. On April 28, 2004, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint. On June 7, 2004, the a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement was filed by plaintiffs and defendant KPMG LLP only. The settlement fund was in the amount of $23.5 million. On September 10, 2004, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment as to defendant KPMG LLP.

The original Complaint alleges that the Defendants made material false or misleading
statements, and failed to disclose material information, in Offering Memoranda,
Prospectuses, SEC filings, and other public statements during the Class
Period. On September 5, 2001, and in subsequent press releases, Hayes
announced that it would be restating its financial statements for fiscal years
1999 and 2000 and the related quarterly periods, and for the first quarter of
fiscal 2001. These financial statements had been contained in the offering
memorandum for the Senior Bonds and had been relied upon by Plaintiffs and
Class members when deciding to purchase Hayes Bonds during the Class Period,
both in the initial offering (with respect to the Senior Bonds) and in the
secondary market (with respect to all of the Bonds). According to a Company
press release, the restatements would "correct errors that the Company and its
auditors, KPMG LLP, have identified in the accounting for certain items, and
write down the value of certain impaired assets ..." The Chairman of the
Company's audit committee was quoted as saying that "[t]hese accounting errors
occurred because of a failure within certain parts of the Company to comply
with sound and well-established accounting policies." After Hayes announced
that it would restate its financial statements, the market value of the Bonds
purchased by the Class members plunged dramatically. The Complaint asserts claims under Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of
1933 (the "Securities Act"), 15 U.S.C. section 77l; Section 15 of the
Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. section 77o; Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), 15 U.S.C. section 78j(b) and Rule 10b-5, 17
C.F.R. 240.10b-5, promulgated thereunder; Section 18 of the Exchange Act, 15
U.S.C. section 78r; and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. section
78t(a).

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Electronic Instruments & Controls
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol:
Company Market: Undetermined
Market Status: Unknown

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. Michigan
DOCKET #: 02-CV-71778
JUDGE: Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow
DATE FILED: 05/04/2002
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/03/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/05/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington)
    1201 N. Market Street, Suite 2100, Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington), DE 19801
    302.622.7000 302.622.7100 · lawyers@gelaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. Michigan
DOCKET #: 02-CV-71778
JUDGE: Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow
DATE FILED: 04/28/2004
CLASS PERIOD START: 06/03/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/05/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington)
    1201 N. Market Street, Suite 2100, Grant & Eisenhofer (Wilmington), DE 19801
    302.622.7000 302.622.7100 · lawyers@gelaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date