Ms. Murphy specializes in federal securities class actions, consumer class actions, data breach class actions, and shareholder derivative actions. Ms. Murphy is highly experienced in all aspects of complex litigation and has successfully litigated numerous class actions from inception through discovery, appeals, and court approved settlement.
- Credit Rating Immunity? How the Hands-Off Approach Toward Credit Rating Agencies Led to the Subprime Credit Crisis and the Need for Greater Accountability, 62 Okla. L. Rev. 735 (2010).
- Paul Spitzberg v. Houston American Energy Corporation, et al., 758 F.3d 676 (5th Cir. 2014); and
- Patipan Nakkhumpun v. Daniel J. Taylor, et al., 782 F.3d 1142 (10th Cir. 2015).
- Oklahoma Bar Association.
- Angley v. UTi Worldwide Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-02006-CBM-E (C.D. Cal. 2014), a securities class action brought against corporate officers for 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.
- Lortiz v. Exide Technologies, et al., Case No. 2:13-cv-02607-SVW-E (C.D. Cal. 2013), a securities class action brought against corporate officers for alleged misrepresentations that concealed the company’s environmental abuses and worsening financial condition. The case was highly technical, involving several experts, more than 3 million pages of document production, 26 depositions, and numerous dispositive motions. The case settled just weeks before trial for a recovery that recouped approximately 35.6% of investors’ losses, despite the company being in bankruptcy.
- Nakkhumpun v. Taylor, et al., Case No. 1:12-cv-01038-CMA-CBS (D. Colo. 2012), a 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.