Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 02/08/2010 (Stipulation and order of dismissal (voluntary dismissal))

Filing Date: January 15, 2010

According to the complaint filed January 15, 2010, on December 17, 2009, the Company filed the Proxy with the SEC in connection with the Proposed Transaction. The Proxy omits material information regarding the financial advisor retained in connection with the Proposed Transaction.

Specifically, the Proxy states that JP Morgan was retained as the Company's financial advisor in the Proposed Transaction but fails to inform the shareholders the (i) criteria used for selecting JP Morgan, (ii) which other investment advisors (if any) were considered, and (iii) the amount of compensation received by JP Morgan for services performed to Harleysville and First Niagara in the past. It is material for shareholders to be informed as to why the Board selected JP Morgan as well as any other financial and economic interests JP Morgan or its clients have in the Proposed Transaction or in the parties involved that could be perceived or create a conflict of interest.

On February 2, 2010, a motion to dismiss the complaint was filed. According to the Stipulation of Dismissal filed on February 8, 2010, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties and their respective counsel that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed with prejudice and without costs to any party as against all defendants, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Regional Banks
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: HNBC
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: E.D. Pennsylvania
DOCKET #: 10-CV-00204
JUDGE: Hon. Gene E.K. Pratter
DATE FILED: 01/15/2010
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/26/2009
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/15/2010
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Brodsky & Smith, LLC
    Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Brodsky & Smith, LLC, PA 19004
    610.667.6200 610.667.6200 ·
  2. Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
    30 Broad Street, 15 1h Floor, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, NY 10004
    212.363.7500 212.363-7171 ·
  3. Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.
    919 N. Market Street, Suite 980, Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., DE 19803
    302.295.5310 302.295.5310 · info@rigrodskylong.com
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date