Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 02/27/2017 (Date of order of final judgment)

Filing Date: April 05, 2013

According to the law firm press release, the Complaint alleges that Defendants violated the Exchange Act by issuing during the Class Period materially false and misleading statements regarding Wal-Mart de Mexico's business practices with respect to unlawful or unethical bribery conduct. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Wal-Mart de Mexico failed to disclose that it had been involved in a bribery scheme, and as a result of the false and misleading statements disseminated by Defendants, the Wal-Mart de Mexico ADRs traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.

On April 22, 2012, The New York Times published an article concerning bribes made by Walmart de Mexico beginning as early as 2005. According to the article Walmart de Mexico spent more than $24 million in bribes. The article further alleged that Walmart de Mexico executives knew about the payments and actively took steps to conceal them.

On June 10, 2013, the Court issued an Order appointing lead plaintiff and approving the selection of lead counsel.

On January 5, 2016, the Court issued an Order denying defendant's motion to dismiss.

Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on April 7, 2016.

On February 27, 2017, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Retail (Grocery)
Headquarters: Mexico

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: WMMVY
Company Market: OTC-BB
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 #: 13-CV-02282
JUDGE: Hon. Victor Marrero
DATE FILED: 04/05/2013
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/21/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/22/2012
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Gainey McKenna & Egleston
    440 Park Avenue South, 5th Floor, Gainey McKenna & Egleston, NY 10016
    212.983.1300 212.983.0380 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 13-CV-02282
JUDGE: Hon. Victor Marrero
DATE FILED: 04/07/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/08/2011
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/24/2012
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Gainey McKenna & Egleston
    440 Park Avenue South, 5th Floor, Gainey McKenna & Egleston, NY 10016
    212.983.1300 212.983.0380 ·
No Document Title Filing Date