Federman & Sherwood were lead plaintiffs’ counsel in this securities class action against UTi Worldwide, Inc. Plaintiffs alleged that the corporate officers were making alleged misrepresentations that failed to disclose problems with the company’s new operating systems, including significant invoicing delays, and the resulting liquidity constraints. The case involved extensive motion practice, a successful appeal to the Ninth Circuit, more than 2 million pages of document production, multiple depositions, and ultimately a settlement that recovered approximately 40.6% of investors’ losses.
Federman & Sherwood were lead plaintiffs’ counsel in this securities class action against Exide Technologies, and certain of its former officers and directors. Plaintiffs alleged investors were damaged by false and misleading statements made by defendants about Exide’s environmental compliance and financial condition and reports. The case was filed after Exide filed bankruptcy and was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Federman & Sherwood was able to settle the case three weeks before the start of a lengthy trial recovering, despite Exide’s bankruptcy, approximately 35.6% of investors’ losses, more than three times the historical median settlement for cases of this size.
Federman & Sherwood were lead plaintiff’s counsel in the securities class action against former officers and directors of Delta Petroleum Corporation for allegedly misrepresenting the company’s financial condition and the value of its assets. The case was successfully appealed to the Tenth Circuit and later settled for a distribution to investors of nearly 73% of their losses.
Federman & Sherwood were lead plaintiff’s counsel in this securities class action against Houston American Energy Corp., and certain of its former officers and directors. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants misrepresented recoverable reserves and the success rate of the Company’s oil and gas drilling activities in South America. During the litigation, Federman & Sherwood were successful in reversing the district court order initially dismissing the Complaint. Federman & Sherwood led the appellate efforts and discovery that resulted in a very favorable settlement for the investors. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
Federman & Sherwood were lead plaintiff’s counsel in this securities class action against Ener1, Inc., and certain of its officers and directors. This case was filed against one of the then-leading electrical vehicle manufacturers. It was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs alleged significant accounting and financial misrepresentations relating to the Company’s unsold inventory and failure to adequately disclose the Company’s liquidity crisis and improper revenue recognition on sales of electric vehicles and that the Company lacked adequate internal financial controls and the financial statements were not prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Federman & Sherwood were lead plaintiff’s counsel in an action against Broadwind Energy, Inc., and certain of its officers and directors, one of the early pioneers in providing products and services to the U.S. wind energy industry. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants violated numerous accounting and audit standards in their reporting of financial impairment charges, thereby misrepresenting the Company’s financial condition and results, allowing the Company and insiders to sell additional securities.
Shareholder Derivative Actions
Federman & Sherwood were one of the lead attorneys representing shareholders in a derivative action to recover damages suffered by shareholders of Galena BioPharma, Inc. Plaintiff alleged breach of fiduciary duties by the Company’s board members. The action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. As part of the settlement, Galena’s officers and directors’ insurers paid $15 million, in addition to causing former officers and directors to forfeit stock options and severance payments. The Company also, as a result of the lawsuit, implemented strengthened corporate government reforms.