Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 04/01/2011 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: August 06, 2009

According to a press release dated August 6, 2009, the complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued numerous statements regarding the Company’s financial performance. As alleged in the complaint, these statements were materially false and misleading because defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts, among others: (i) that the Company was reporting materially inaccurate revenue figures; (ii) that the Company’s reported financial results were materially misstated and did not present the true operating performance of the Company; (iii) that the Company’s shareholders’ equity was materially overstated during the Class Period, including the overstatement of shareholders’ equity by $20.6 million at December 31, 2006; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company, its corporate governance practices, its prospects and earnings growth.

On March 17, 2008, the Company disclosed that it did not maintain effective controls over the accounting and disclosure of insurance policy benefits and the liabilities for insurance products and that it would therefore be restating its financial results for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2006, along with affected Selected Consolidated Financial Data for 2003 and 2004, and quarterly financial information for 2006 and the first three quarters of 2007.

In response to this announcement, shares of the Company’s stock fell $1.30 per share, or 12.9%, from a close of $10.06 per share on March 14, 2008, the last trading date before the announcement, to close at $8.76 per share, on extremely heavy trading volume.

According to the Order dated October 30, 2009, Monroe County is appointed Lead Plaintiff and the law firm of Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robins LLP is appointed Lead Counsel.

On January 12, 2010, the lead plaintiff filed an Amended Class Action Complaint. On March 12, 2010, the defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint. Before any ruling on the motion, the lead plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint on June 2, 2010. On August 2, 2010, the defendants responded by filing a Motion to Dismiss The Corrected Second Amended Complaint in it's Entirety and with Prejudice.

According to an article dated March 31, 2011, a New York federal judge on Wednesday tossed a putative shareholder class action over Conseco Inc.'s restatement of several years of financial results in 2008, agreeing with the insurer that the suit failed to allege fraud.

The plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal from the judgment in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeal was later withdrawn according to the copy of the Mandate entered on June 20, 2011.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Insurance (Life)
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CNO
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 #: 09-CV-06966
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 08/06/2009
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/04/2005
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/17/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville)
    58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 · info@csgrr.com/
  2. Sugarman & Susskind
    100 Miracle Mile, Suite 300, Sugarman & Susskind, FL 33134
    305/529-2801 305/447-8115 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 09-CV-06966
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 06/02/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/04/2005
CLASS PERIOD END: 03/17/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville)
    58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (Melville), NY 11747
    631.367.7100 631.367.1173 ·
No Document Title Filing Date