FRT’s Fast Five: Week ending April 26, 2019

Financial Recovery Technologies Fast Five provides you with the top news in shareholder class actions. Stay up-to-date on the latest developments in settled (U.S./Canada) claims filing opportunities, Antitrust settlements, Global Group Litigation matters and more. For more information, contact your Financial Recovery Technologies representative or email us.

1. Class Attys Seek a Third of $12.5M BNY Mellon ERISA Deal

Ciresi Conlin LLP and McTigue Law LLP are asking for one-third of the $12.5 million settlement they negotiated with BNY Mellon over allegations it used unfavorable foreign currency conversion rates to swipe profits from retirement plan participants. The plan participants asked a New York federal judge on Tuesday for final approval of the settlement, saying that after three years of litigation, the deal presents a great recovery for other participants in retirement pools that received worse conversion rates on dividends for Bank of New York Mellon Corp.’s American depositary receipts than the bank used for its own conversions. Click here to read the full article (subscription may be needed).

2. Gene Therapy Co. Hit With Suit Over $877M Sale to Biogen

A shareholder suit filed Tuesday in Boston federal court accuses London-based gene therapy developer Nightstar Therapeutics of leaving out key information in a regulatory filing about Biogen’s plan to buy the company for $877 million, and asks a judge to delay a vote on the deal. Shareholder Stephen Bushansky alleges that in an April 9 proxy statement, Nightstar failed to disclose company insiders’ potential conflicts of interest or explain its financial adviser’s analysis regarding the deal that was announced in early March. Nightstar and its individual directors, including chairman Chris Hollowood and CEO David Fellows, are named as defendants. Click here to read the full article (subscription may be needed).

3. Passing the Class Actions Buck to the Federal Court

The High Court’s decision to dismiss an appeal in the Get Swift case returned attention to the difficult role the courts must play in managing and regulating copycat class actions. The High Court decided there was no need to rethink the Federal Court’s decision in the beauty parade of the willing plaintiffs, confirming that only one of three claims will go forward. It is not the first time this year that the class actions ball has been left in the Fed’s court. In fact, after the Australian Law Reform Commission’s recent report on class actions, it looks as if the impetus for change will have to come from the judiciary not Parliament. One ALRC recommendation is that the Federal Court should have exclusive jurisdiction over shareholder class action claims. Click here to read the full article (subscription may be needed).

4. Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Rise of Securities-Fraud Class Actions

The United States has a complex regime of securities-fraud enforcement in place to protect its securities markets. The trick is having a regime that deters fraud while simultaneously encouraging information sharing. The problem is that our current regime is not up to the task, primarily because it allows for securities-fraud class actions. These actions have become much more frequent over the last three decades, spurred on by the Supreme Court’s decision in Basic Inc. v. Levinson. Click here to read the full article.

5. Report: Securities Class Actions Involving Non-US Issuers Hold Steady for Second Year

A report published by Dechert earlier this month indicates that the plaintiffs bar is increasingly targeting foreign companies with little connection to the U.S. market as defendants in securities class action suits filed in U.S. courts. David Kistenbroker, a partner and global co-leader of Dechert’s white-collar and securities litigation practice in Chicago, said from 2010 to 2016 there was an average of 29 class action securities suits against non-U.S. issuers filed in U.S. courts each year. Click here to read the full article.

Learn More

To learn more about how FRT can help your firm maximize recoveries in shareholder class action settlements, contact us at learnmore@frtservices.com.

About FRT

SETTLED CLAIMS  I  PASSIVE GROUP  I  ANTITRUST  I  FUTURE CLAIMS  I  OPT-IN MONITORING  I OPT-OUT MONITORING

Founded in 2008, Financial Recovery Technologies (FRT) is the leading technology-based services firm that helps the investment community identify eligibility, file claims and collect funds made available in securities and other class action settlements. Offering the most comprehensive range of claim filing and monitoring services available, we provide best-in-class eligibility analysis, disbursement auditing and client reporting, and deliver the highest level of accuracy, accountability and transparency available. For more information, go to www.frtservices.com.

This communication and the content found by following any link herein are being provided to you by Financial Recovery Technologies (FRT) for informational purposes only and does not constitute advice. All material presented herein is believed to be reliable but FRT makes no representation or warranty with respect to this communication or such content and expressly disclaims any implied warranty under law. Opinions expressed in this communication may change without prior notice. Firms should always seek legal and financial advice specific to their unique situation and objectives.

Search Tags

Our Authors

Ally GosmanAlly Gosman

Sr. Marketing Specialist

Andrew LaskyAndrew Lasky

Legal Product Specialist

Jenn RothenbergJenn Rothenberg

VP of Marketing

Mike LangeMike Lange

Securities Litigation Counsel

Latest News