Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 09/30/2011 (Date of order of distribution of settlement)

Filing Date: October 31, 2008

According to a October 31, 2008, press release, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements about General Growth’s access to financing. Specifically, defendants represented that the company had the ability to refinance billions of dollars in debt that was coming due in the fall of 2008 and spring of 2009 on acceptable terms. In fact, the company did not have access to such financing. Further, defendants failed to disclose that the Company’s President/Chief Operating Officer and its Chief Financial Officer had received loans from the Chief Executive Officer’s family trust in violation of the Company’s own Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.

On September 22, 2008, the Company announced that it was pursuing a comprehensive evaluation of its financial and strategic alternatives. On October 3, 2008, the Company suspended its dividend and then, on October 27, 2008, announced it was marketing for sale its portfolio of retail properties in Las Vegas. On this series of disclosures, General Growth’s stock price collapsed, falling from $21.42 on September 19, 2008 to less than $2.00 per share on October 27, 2008, or nearly 95% from its Class Period high of $43.83 per share.

On April 07, 2009, in accordance with this Court's oral ruling, this action was hereby dismissed without prejudice and the civil case was terminated.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Real Estate Operations
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: GGP
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: N.D. Illinois
DOCKET #: 08-CV-06258
JUDGE: Hon. Milton I. Shadur
DATE FILED: 10/31/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/30/2008
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/26/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 · info@csgrr.com/
  2. Miller Law LLC
    115 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 2910, Miller Law LLC, IL 60603
    312.676.2665 · info@MillerLawLLC.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. Illinois
DOCKET #: 09-CV-00487
JUDGE: Hon. Milton I. Shadur
DATE FILED: 01/26/2009
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/30/2008
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/26/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC (Chicago)
    190 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1705, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC (Chicago), IL 60603
    312.357.0370 312.357.0369 ·
  2. Izard Nobel P.C.
    20 Church Street, Suite 1700, Izard Nobel P.C., CO 06103
    860.493.6292 860.493.6292 · firm@izardnobel.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date