Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 10/31/2007 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: February 14, 2003

According to the latest docket posted, on March 11, 2003, the case was consolidated with lead case 02-CV-3288. On January 12, 2004, the Court entered the Opinion and Order # 89535, signed by U.S. District Judge Denise L. Cote, that the motion brought by UBS to dismiss the claims against it in the GOALs Litigation is granted.

The 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 a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period. Defendants were all officers and/or directors of Worldcom, Inc.
("Worldcom") during the Class Period. The Complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading statements regarding Worldcom. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period Worldcom's revenue, earnings, income and assets were materially overstated and its financial statements issued during the Class Period violated Generally Accepted Auditing Principles ("GAAP"). As a result of defendants' violations of the federal securities laws Worldcom has declared bankruptcy and its shares are virtually worthless. The Complaint alleges that the purchase price of the GOALs(+) was materially inflated because their value was directly tied to the market value of Worldcom common stock, which was materially inflated as a result of the fraud.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Communications Services
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 03-CV-1052
JUDGE: Hon. Denise L. Cote
DATE FILED: 02/14/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/17/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/25/2002
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Abbey Gardy, LLP (New York)
    212 East 39th Street, Abbey Gardy, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.889.3700 · info@abbeygardy.com
  2. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York)
    200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
  3. 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