Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 07/19/2004 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: August 20, 2003

On July 19, 2004, the Court entered the Order and Final Judgment by U.S. District Judge T. S. Ellis III dismissing the complaint with prejudice. The Court awarded Plaintiff’s counsel 23.53% of the gross settlement fund as and for their fees, and $153,297.24 in reimbursement of expenses. The case is closed.

According to a press release dated April 28, 2004, a settlement for $1,700,000 has been proposed. A hearing will be held on July 16, 2004 to determine whether the proposed settlement should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate, and to consider the application of Plaintiffs' Counsel for attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses.

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 a series of material misrepresentations to the market between October 30, 2002 and August 13, 2003. On August 14, 2003, before the market opened, defendants shocked the public when they issued a press release and concurrently filed a Form
8-K with the SEC announcing that BearingPoint's financial results would
be restated for the first three quarters of fiscal 2003 due to
acquisition and accounting relating adjustments. The market's reaction
to the announcement was swift and drastic. On August 14, 2003, the
price per share of BearingPoint common stock fell $2.41 or 23 percent
from its previous day's trading to close at $7.90, on unusually heavy
trading volume.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Business Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: BE
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. Virginia
DOCKET #: 03-CV-1062
JUDGE: Hon. T. S. Ellis III
DATE FILED: 08/20/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/30/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/13/2003
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
  2. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
  3. Brian Felgoise
  4. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York)
  5. Cauley Geller, Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (Boca Raton, FL)
  6. Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. (Washington, DC)
  7. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
  8. Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel (Lawrence)
  9. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (New York, NY)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: E.D. Virginia
DOCKET #: 03-CV-1062
JUDGE: Hon. T. S. Ellis III
DATE FILED: 01/06/2004
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/30/2002
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/13/2003
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available