Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 10/11/2006 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: April 12, 2005

According to an article dated October 20, 2006, plaintiff's putative class action alleged that defendant Glaxo Smithkline PLC (GSK) and its chief executive violated Securities Exchange Act §10(b) and Rule 10b-5 by making false and misleading statements as to GSK's drug Paxil, damaging GSK investors. The court dismissed plaintiff's complaint, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim. In dismissing, as time-barred, claims that GSK withheld information over alleged difficulties experienced by patients discontinuing their use of Paxil, the court noted that plaintiff was on notice of any claim based on the discontinuation claims more than two years before bringing suit. It also ruled that plaintiff failed to allege the scienter element of securities fraud. Further, plaintiff failed to plead economic loss as to claims that GSK misrepresented the safety and efficacy of Paxil's use in children and also failed to plead loss causation on other claims, including a claim that GSK violated the False Claims Act by overcharging Medicare and Medicaid for its products.

The original complaint charges GlaxoSmithKline and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. GlaxoSmithKline along with its subsidiaries constitute a global healthcare group engaged in the creation, discovery, development, manufacture and marketing of pharmaceutical and consumer health-related products. Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the prices of GlaxoSmithKline’s stock and ADRs were artificially inflated by defendants concealing deficiencies with the Company’s selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (“SSRI”) drug, Paxil, in treating adolescent depression. On August 5, 2004, The Wall Street Journal published an article that reported that a new analysis by the FDA had confirmed the link between SSRIs (including Paxil) and suicidal tendencies in young people. The prices of GlaxoSmithKline’s stock and ADRs, which were inflated during the Class Period, declined as the falsity of defendants’ statements came to light.

A similar class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and has been transferred and consolidated with the the lead action in the Southern District of New York.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Major Drugs
Headquarters: United Kingdom

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: GSK
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 05-CV-3751
JUDGE: Hon. Loretta A. Preska
DATE FILED: 04/12/2005
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/21/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/05/2004
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. 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
  2. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (NY)
    200 Broadhollow Road, Suite 406, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (NY), NY 11747
    631-367-7100 631-367-1173 ·
  3. Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
    330 Main Street, Schatz & Nobel, P.C., CT 06106
    800.797.5499 860.493.6290 · sn06106@AOL.com
  4. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  5. Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
    P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut), CT 06415
    860.537.5537 860.537.4432 · scottlaw@scott-scott.com
  6. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
    6 East 45th Street, Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), NY 10017
    310.209.2468 310.209.2087 · SSBNY@aol.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 05-CV-3751
JUDGE: Hon. Loretta A. Preska
DATE FILED: 04/06/2006
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/27/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/05/2004
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles)
    10940 Wilshire Boulevard - Suite 2300, Stull, Stull & Brody (Los Angeles), CA 90024
    310.209.2468 ·
  2. Stull, Stull & Brody (New York)
    6 East 45th Street, Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), NY 10017
    310.209.2468 310.209.2087 · SSBNY@aol.com
  3. Weiss & Lurie (New York, NY)
    The French Building, 551 Fifth Ave., Suite 1600, Weiss & Lurie (New York, NY), NY 10126
    212.682.3025 212.682.3010 · info@wyca.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date