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.
A recent Law360 guest article published by two Ropes & Gray LLP attorneys that challenges a forthcoming law review article attempts to dissuade mutual funds from engaging in shareholder litigation. The challenge by Amy Roy and Robert Skinner purports to address the “practical realities of mutual funds acting as plaintiffs” while ignoring the practical realities of securities litigation. Indeed, under the right circumstances, it often makes sense for mutual funds to participate in securities litigation. Click here to read the full article (subscription may be needed).
A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland has confirmed the legality of litigation funding for class actions in Queensland and brings Queensland in line with the class actions regimes in other Australian jurisdictions. The case of Murphy Operator & Ors v Gladstone Ports Corporation & Anor (No 4)  QSC 228 saw a class action bought by a group of plaintiffs who ran commercial fishing operations and claimed to have suffered loss and damage as a result of dredging operations by the defendant, GPC, who managed the Port of Gladstone. In particular, the class action claimed that the dredged soil was not stored properly and the acidity of the exposed soil caused seafood species in waters proximate to the Gladstone Harbour to become depleted. The class action initially had some difficulties securing funding, but sometime after filing the proceeding, secured the assistance of litigation funder LCM. Click here to read the full article.
On September 30, 2019, Judge Loretta A. Preska of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed federal securities claims brought against a Japanese investment advisor and asset manager, its parent, and its former CEO. Plaintiffs, former senior executives of the Company or one of its subsidiaries, alleged that defendants engaged in a scheme to devalue plaintiffs’ stock acquisition rights (“SARs”) and to force them to sell their SARs back to the Company at the artificially deflated price, in violation of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The Court dismissed the Exchange Act claims finding that most plaintiffs failed to sufficiently allege a sale and that all plaintiffs failed to allege reliance or loss causation. Click here to read the full article.
Investors who have inked $2.3 billion in settlements with big banks over the alleged rigging of foreign exchange markets told a New York federal court Wednesday that the lone objector to a $300 million attorney’s fee award has agreed to drop his opposition. Click here to read the full article (subscription may be needed).
A proposed investor class action against Teva Pharmaceuticals will be moved from Pennsylvania to Connecticut, where it will join other investor suits over the drugmaker’s alleged price-fixing after a Philadelphia federal judge said the suit was not sufficiently tied to antitrust multidistrict litigation in his district. Click here to read the full article (subscription may be needed).
Subscribe to FRT’s Monthly Newsletter
Financial Recovery Technologies’ Shareholder Litigation Fast Five provides you with the top news in shareholder class actions. This is your exclusive summary of the latest industry developments related to settled, group and antitrust actions and recovery opportunities. Click here to subscribe.
To learn more about how FRT can help your firm maximize recoveries in shareholder class action settlements, contact us at email@example.com.
- [WEBINAR] Trends in Global Shareholder Litigation: Implementing a Governance Policy
- Securities Class Action Cases: Quarterly Disbursed Claims – Q2-2019
- Case Spotlight: Daimler AG
- Three Key Things to Know About Non-U.S. Jurisdictions
- FX Case Update (March 2019): Memo filed in support of motion for initial distribution
- Case Spotlight: FX Canada
- Three Non-U.S. Passive Participation Opportunities to Keep on Your Radar
- EU Proposal May Move European Jurisdiction Risk Profiles Closer to the U.S.
- Unique Data in Complex J.P. Morgan ADR Case Presents Filing Challenges
- A Primer on Shareholder Class Action
- A Primer on Antitrust Class Litigation
- A Primer on Global Group Litigation
- A Primer on Future Claims Recovery
- Illustrating The Outer Time Limits By Which Filing Decisions Must Be Made
- Calculating Inflationary Losses for Comparison to Loss Thresholds
- Global Landscape Continues to Evolve in the Wake of Morrison Decision
- Jurisdiction Risk Profiles:
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.
- Follow us on Twitter: @FRTServices
- Follow us on LinkedIn Financial Recovery Technologies
- Email us: firstname.lastname@example.org
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 do 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.