Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 03/30/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: May 06, 2014

According to the law firm press release, Ruby Tuesday, together with its subsidiaries, owns, develops, operates, and franchises a chain of hundreds of casual dining restaurants in the United States and internationally.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Ruby Tuesday issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s financial performance and future prospects and failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that changes made to the menu at the Company’s flagship Ruby Tuesday chain to increase the range of offerings and price points were negatively impacting sales, as the average sales check price was declining without contemporaneous increases in traffic; (ii) that contrary to the reported progress being made in a turnaround effort, same-store sales were continuing to decline exponentially at the Company’s flagship Ruby Tuesday chain; (iii) that the Company had experienced a dramatic decline in sales at its Lime Fresh Grill restaurants, and as a result, the carrying value of that chain’s goodwill, trademark and properties and equipment was materially impaired; (iv) that the Company’s expenses and losses were being materially understated; (v) that the value of the Company’s deferred tax assets were overstated; and (vi) that based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company’s business during the Class Period. As a result of these false and misleading statements and omissions, Ruby Tuesday common stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.

On July 24, 2013, defendants reported Ruby Tuesday’s fourth quarter and fiscal 2013 financial results, including declining same-restaurant sales at the flagship Ruby Tuesday restaurants and a $27 million fourth quarter 2013 net loss from continuing operations due in large part to an impairment of the Lime Fresh Grill trademark and related assets and taking a valuation allowance on the Company’s deferred tax assets. On this news, the Company’s stock price fell, closing down at $7.84 per share on July 25, 2013. Then, on October 9, 2013, the Company reported a significant decline in first quarter 2014 revenues and an increase in net losses, driven by further severe same-store sales declines at the flagship Ruby Tuesday restaurants, which the Company disclosed would last at least through the second quarter 2014. On this news the Company’s stock price fell further, closing at $6.26 per share on October 10, 2013.

On October 1, 2014, the Court issued an Order appointing lead plaintiff and approving lead counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on December 15.

On March 31, 2016, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

On April 21, 2016, the Court approved the appointment of a new Lead Plaintiff.

On March 29, 2017, the parties entered into a Stipulation of Settlement.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Restaurants
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: RT
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: M.D. Tennessee
DOCKET #: 14-CV-01119
JUDGE: Hon. Kevin H. Sharp
DATE FILED: 05/06/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/11/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/09/2013
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Barrett Johnston, LLC
    217 Second Avenue, North, Barrett Johnston, LLC, TN 37201-1601
    615/244-2202 ·
  2. 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
COURT: M.D. Tennessee
DOCKET #: 14-CV-01119
JUDGE: Hon. Kevin H. Sharp
DATE FILED: 12/15/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/10/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 10/09/2013
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC
    414 Union Street, Suite 900, Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC, TN 37219
    615-244-2202 615-252-3798 ·
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
No Document Title Filing Date