Processing your request


please wait...

Case Page

 

Case Status:    ONGOING    
On or around 02/18/2020 (Date of last review)

Filing Date: September 25, 2019

According to the Complaint, Sundial purports to produce and market craft pioneering cannabis brands to “Heal, Help and Play.” Sundial operates five facilities, including two facilities in Alberta, Canada and three in the United Kingdom, and as of August 2019, was building a third Canadian facility in British Columbia.

The Complaint alleges that Defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Sundial failed to supply saleable cannabis in line with contractual obligations to Zenabis Global Inc.; (2) due to material quality issues, Zenabis had to return or reject a total of 554 kg of cannabis to Sundial, valued at approximately U.S. $1.9 million (C$2.5 million); and (3) as a result, Defendants’ statements about Sundial’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

On December 20, 2019, the Court issued an Order consolidating cases and appointing Co-Lead Plaintiffs and Counsel. Co-Lead Plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated Complaint on February 18, 2020.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Biotechnology & Drugs
Headquarters: Canada

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: SNDL
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: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 19-CV-08913
JUDGE: Hon. Andrew L. Carter, Jr.
DATE FILED: 09/25/2019
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/01/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/25/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (NY)
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 19-CV-08913
JUDGE: Hon. Andrew L. Carter, Jr.
DATE FILED: 02/18/2020
CLASS PERIOD START: 08/01/2019
CLASS PERIOD END: 09/25/2019
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Levi & Korsinsky LLP (New York)
    55 Broadway, Ste 10th Floor, Levi & Korsinsky LLP (New York), NY 10006
    212.363.7500 ·
  2. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (Jenkintown)
    101 Greenwood Avenue Suite 440 , The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (Jenkintown), PA 19046
    215-600-2817 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
—Related District Court Filings Data is not available