Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 04/08/2005 (Other)

Filing Date: May 15, 2003

According to the docket posted, on November 23, 2004, the Court issued an Order granting the defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment in its entirety and the plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed with prejudice. The plaintiffs have filed a Notice of Appeal. On April 8, 2005, the Court entered the Mandate from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeal was dismissed with prejudice, without costs and without attorneys’ fees.

According to a Decision of Interest from the New York Journal of Law dated April 5, 2004, Lehman Brothers motion to dismiss the lawsuit on five separate grounds was denied in its entirety. In its motion, the Company alleged that: First, the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the pleading requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) and the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act ('PSLRA'). Second, that plaintiffs have failed to meet the PSLRA standard for pleading scienter. Third, that plaintiffs' claims should be dismissed pursuant to the "bespeaks caution" doctrine because the reports in question expressed numerous reservations about RealNetworks and the risks of investing
therein. Fourth, that the complaint fails to adequately allege "transaction causation" (as it is called in securities law parlance), or "reliance" (as it is otherwise referred to in the law of fraud). Fifth, that the complaint fails adequately to allege "loss causation" except in a way that renders plaintiffs' claim barred by the appropriate statute of limitations. The court rejected all those claims.

The original lawsuit charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading analyst reports on RealNetworks, a global provider of software products
and services for internet media delivery, in a bid to win or maintain lucrative banking and advisory work from the Company. As a result of defendants' false and misleading statements, the market price of RealNetworks common stock was artificially inflated, maintained or stabilized during the Class Period.

On or about April 28, 2003, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") issued a complaint charging Lehman with violating numerous rules of conduct of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. ("NASD") and the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. ("NYSE"), by issuing false and misleading analyst reports on numerous companies, including RealNetworks. The complaint describes the influence and control exerted by Lehman's investment bankers on its supposedly independent research analysts, and details how positive ratings and research reports on RealNetworks issued by defendants to the public were contrary to defendants' more negative assessments of the Company's true value and prospects. Lehman eventually settled these charges by the SEC for the payment of $50 million.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Investment Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: RNWK
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 03-CV-3470
JUDGE: Hon. Jed S. Rakoff
DATE FILED: 05/15/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/01/1999
CLASS PERIOD END: 06/30/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP
    275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, NY 10016
    212.682.1818 212.682.1892 · email@murrayfrank.com
  2. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 03-CV-3470
JUDGE: Hon. Jed S. Rakoff
DATE FILED: 09/22/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/11/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/18/2000
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP (former New York, NY)
    805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP (former New York, NY), NY 10022
    212.687.1980 212.687.7714 · info@kaplanfox.com
  2. Pomerantz LLP (New York)
    600 Third Avenue, Pomerantz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.661.1100 212.661.8665 · info@pomerantzlaw.com/
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date