Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 12/01/2017 (Ongoing date of last review)

Filing Date: September 09, 2014

According to the law firm press release, the lawsuit alleges that Sea World failed to disclose in its IPO documents that it (a) had improperly cared for and mistreated its Orca population which adversely impacted trainer and audience safety; (b) continued to feature and breed an Orca that had killed and injured numerous trainers; and (c) consequently created material uncertainties and risks existing at the time of IPO that could adversely impact attendance at its family oriented parks. The lawsuit claims that when details of the Company's improper practices were revealed by the documentary film Blackfish, SeaWorld misled investors by claiming the decrease in attendance at its parks was caused by Easter holiday and other factors. The complaint asserts that the decline in attendance was really caused by the mounting negative publicity from the improper practices at SeaWorld that were revealed by the Blackfish film.

On August 13, 2014, the price of SeaWorld Stock dropped by $9.25 per share, or 32.9%. This drop followed SeaWorld's announcement of earnings for the second quarter of 2014, where it revealed that revenues fell year over year and acknowledged for the first time that its earnings difficulties were related to negative publicity it has received in connection with its treatment of animals.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Recreational Activities
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: SEAS
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. California
DOCKET #: 14-CV-02129
JUDGE: Hon. Michael M. Anello
DATE FILED: 09/09/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/18/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/13/2014
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. California
DOCKET #: 14-CV-02129
JUDGE: Hon. Michael M. Anello
DATE FILED: 05/31/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/29/2013
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/12/2014
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Grant & Eisenhofer (New York)
    45 Rockefeller Center, 630 Fifth Avenue, Grant & Eisenhofer (New York), NY 10111
    646.722.8500 646.722.8500 · lawyers@gelaw.com
  2. Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP (Pennsylvania)
    280 King of Prussia Road, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP (Pennsylvania), PA 19087
    610.667.7706 610.667.7706 · info@ktmc.com
  3. Kirby Noonan Lance & Hoge LLP
    350 10th Avenue, Suite 1300, Kirby Noonan Lance & Hoge LLP, CA 92101
    (619) 231-8666 (619) 231-9593 ·
  4. Nix Patterson & Roach, LLP
    205 Linda Drive, Nix Patterson & Roach, LLP, TX 75638
    903.645.7333 ·
No Document Title Filing Date