 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
| Company: | Sunbeam |
| Settlement: | $110,000,000 (pending) |
| Filed: | 1998 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern Florida |
Wolf Popper was co-lead counsel for the class and achieved one of the largest settlements ever obtained against an accounting firm in a securities action: a settlement (pending Court approval) of $110 million against Arthur Andersen.
| Company: | USN Communications, Inc. |
| Settlement: | approximately $45,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1998 |
| Court: | US District Court of Northern Illinois |
The Court recently approved a settlement Wolf Popper obtained of approximately $45 million for investors, expressly thanking Plaintiffs' co-lead counsel "for all the work you have done and constructive results."
| Company: | Providian Financial |
| Settlement: | $38,000,000 |
| Filed: | 2002 |
| Court: | US District Court of Eastern Pennsylvania |
In In re Providian Financial Securities Litigation, Wolf Popper was co-lead counsel for the plaintiff class and obtained a $38,000,000 judgment from the defendants. The Court, in approving the settlement in June, 2002, remarked on the "extremely high quality" and "skill and efficiency" of plaintiffs' counsel's work, which the Court stated it had seen throughout the litigation. The Federal Court also noted the "extremely high quality" of Wolf Popper's work is reflected in the result which it obtained and in the fact that it is a nationally prominent firm with extensive experience in the field.
| Company: | Price Waterhouse LLP |
| Settlement: | $14,000,000 |
| Filed: | 2001 |
| Court: | US District Court of Northern Illinois |
After a full hearing and several days of testimony, the arbitrator awarded plaintiffs the total damages claimed, $14 million.
| Company: | American Stock Exchange |
| Settlement: | over $50,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1998 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Wolf Popper achieved a benefit of over $50 million in the settlement of the litigation over the merger of the American Stock Exchange and the NASD. The Court complimented the Firm for its "terrific job" in negotiating a "substantial [recovery]."
| Company: | Chambers Development Co. |
| Settlement: | $95,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1996 |
| Court: | US District Court of Western Pennsylvania |
Wolf Popper was co-lead counsel in a securities litigation that resulted in a $95 million cash settlement for the class in 1996.
| Company: | Wedtech Corporation |
| Settlement: | $77,500,000 |
| Filed: | 1992 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Wolf Popper was the Chair of Plaintiffs' Executive and Scheduling Committees in the consolidated litigation arising out of the national scandal at Wedtech Corporation. The action was settled in 1992 for $77.5 million, one of the then largest settlements in a securities fraud action.
| Company: | Prime Motor Inns |
| Settlement: | $21,600,000 |
| Filed: | 1993 |
| Court: | US District Court of New Jersey |
Wolf Popper served as co-lead counsel in the Prime Motor Inns Shareholder Litigation, which resulted in a settlement of $21.6 million for the class. At the conclusion of the case in 1993, Judge Debevoise complimented plaintiffs' counsel, stating, "The plaintiffs' attorneys have performed their work aggressively, skillfully and with good effect."
| Company: | Gulf Oil/Cities Service Tender Offer |
| Settlement: | $34,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1992 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Wolf Popper served as a member of Plaintiffs' Executive Committee and as Plaintiffs' Lead Settlement Counsel, where a settlement of $34 million, achieved only after the case was fully prepared for trial, was approved by the Court in May 1992.
| Company: | Kerkorian, et al. |
| Settlement: | $35,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1990 |
| Court: | Los Angeles, California Superior Court |
Wolf Popper was the plaintiffs' co-trial counsel, which was settled during trial in October 1990 for $35 million.
| Company: | The Standard Oil Company/British Petroleum |
| Settlement: | $600,000,000 |
| Court: | Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga County, Ohio |
Wolf Popper was the plaintiffs' co-lead counsel in a litigation that resulted in the then largest recovery in the history of securities class actions. Plaintiffs' counsel negotiated and obtained a benefit for the class in excess of $600 million. In its ruling which approved in full counsels' application for attorneys' fees, the Court commented favorably on the quality of co-lead counsel:
- The professional skill required to achieve the resultant benefits to this Class has been evidenced on nearly a daily basis by this Court.
- As a result of this professional skill and excellent representation, these benefits to the Class would not have otherwise been achieved.
- The Court has fully weighed in its decision the benefits bestowed on the Class. At this juncture the Court finds that the benefit is unprecedented.
| Company: | Shell Oil Company, et al. |
| Settlement: | $205,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1985 |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
Wolf Popper was co-lead counsel in the case producing the largest recovery in a securities class action prior to the Standard Oil litigation. The plaintiff stockholders successfully petitioned the Delaware Chancery Court to enjoin the proposed merger of Shell Oil Company and Royal Dutch Petroleum Company. In approving the $205 million recovery in the Shell Oil Litigation, Vice Chancellor Maurice Hartnett stated: "The results achieved in this case for the class are outstanding."
| Company: | Ivan F. Boesky / Drexel Burnham Lambert Group Inc., et al. |
| Settlement: | in excess of $800,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1990 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Wolf Popper played a major role in representing the rights of shareholders in the notorious Boesky/Drexel/Milken trading scandal involving Ivan F. Boesky, Dennis B. Levine, Kidder Peabody & Co. Incorporated, Goldman, Sachs & Co., Drexel, Michael R. Milken, and others. These actions arose from the illegal use by various individuals of non-public information about publicly traded corporations, conveyed to them from high level executives at these large investment firms, to reap illicit profits for personal gain. Wolf Popper was appointed co-lead counsel in several of these actions, including the Boesky insider trading class litigation pending in the Southern District of New York, to represent classes of shareholders who suffered losses as a result of these illicit activities.
The Firm is also one of the lead counsel in the Drexel/Milken litigation also pending in the Southern District of New York. After intensive litigation, the Firm helped recover in excess of $800 million for investors. In the global settlement of these Milken related litigations, the Court specifically certified a worldwide class of investors after notice was given throughout the world, in addition to publications in newspapers worldwide.
| Company: | Salomon Brothers Inc. |
| Settlement: | $54,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1991 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Wolf Popper was a court-appointed co-lead counsel representing a class of Salomon Brothers securities purchasers who brought an action under the federal securities laws arising out of violations of rules of the United States Department of the Treasury in connection with certain auctions of government securities. The litigation ultimately settled for over $54 million.
| Company: | Ahmanson |
| Settlement: | $45,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1989 |
| Court: | Los Angeles Superior Court |
The Firm was co-lead counsel for plaintiffs in litigation involving the alleged "greenmail" of Walt Disney Company by Saul Steinberg and his Reliance Group. There the Los Angeles Superior Court in September 1989 approved a settlement providing for a cash payment of $45 million plus the therapeutic benefit of the termination of certain defendants' claim for rescission which potentially would have cost the company in excess of a billion dollars.
| Company: | Grand Casinos, Inc. |
| Settlement: | $9,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1996 |
| Court: | US District Court of Minnesota |
In the Grand Casinos, Inc. Sec. Litig., a settlement of $9 million was approved in August 2001. In one of the very early decisions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the court sustained various claims finding that plaintiffs met the rigorous pleading standards of the then new Act.
| Company: | Aspec Technology, Inc. |
| Settlement: | $13,000,000 plus 1.75 million shares of stock approved in 2001 |
| Court: | Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara |
| Company: | Adac Laboratories |
| Settlement: | $20,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1998 |
| Company: | Exide Corp. |
| Settlement: | $10,250,000 |
| Filed: | 1998 |
| Court: | US District Court of Eastern Michigan |
| Company: | Archer Daniels Midland Co. |
| Settlement: | $30,000,000 |
| Court: | US District Court of Central Illinois |
| Company: | JWP, Inc. |
| Settlement: | $36,200,000 |
| Filed: | 1992 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
A settlement of $36.2 million from officers, directors, and outside auditors was approved in 1996.
| Company: | Eamer |
| Settlement: | $11 million, plus equitable and therapeutic relief in 1996 |
| Court: | Superior Court, Los Angeles, Cal. |
| Company: | PS Group Inc. |
| Settlement: | $5,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1993 |
| Court: | US District Court of Central Illinois |
| Company: | Pacific Enterprises |
| Settlement: | $35,000,000 |
| Court: | US District Court of Central California |
In the Pacific Enterprises Sec. Litig. (settlement of $35 million approved in 1994), the Judge complimented plaintiffs' co-lead counsel as being "outstanding lawyers" who "could not be improved on for this kind of litigation," and "this group of lawyers merits [respect]."
| Company: | American Business Computers Corporation |
| Settlement: | settlement for cash and stock valued at $6.5 million |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
| Company: | McDonnell Douglas Equipment Leasing |
| Settlement: | $16,000,000 |
In the McDonnell Douglas Equipment Leasing Securities Litigation(a $16 million settlement approved in October 1993), the Court described the Firm as "experienced and competent counsel."
| Company: | Fleet/Norstar |
| Settlement: | $6,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1990 |
| Court: | US District Court of Rhode Island |
| Company: | Marion Merrell Dow Inc. |
| Settlement: | $13,850,000 |
| Filed: | 1992 |
| Court: | US District Court of Western Missouri |
| Company: | Smith Corona Corp. |
| Settlement: | $24,500,000 |
| Filed: | 1989 |
| Court: | US District Court of Connecticut |
| Company: | Metromedia |
| Settlement: | $16,500,000 |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
| Company: | Beatrice |
| Settlement: | $190,000,000 |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
| Company: | International Systems & Controls |
| Settlement: | 100% of the class members' damages |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern Texas |
| Company: | American Southwest Mortgage |
| Settlement: | $5,200,000 |
| Filed: | 1989 |
| Court: | US District Court of Arizona |
| Company: | Stauffer Chemical Co. |
| Settlement: | $11,600,000 |
| Court: | US District Court of Connecticut |
| Company: | Borman's |
| Settlement: | 90% of the class members' damages |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
| Company: | Elscint, Ltd. |
| Settlement: | approximately $12 million |
| Court: | US District Court of Massachussetts |
| Company: | Washington Bancorp, Inc. |
| Settlement: | 200% of the class members' damages |
| Court: | US District Court of New Jersey |
| Company: | Philips N.V. |
| Settlement: | $9,250,000 |
| Filed: | 1990 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
| Company: | Jefferson Smurfit Corporation |
| Settlement: | $10.7 million plus additional equitable relief |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
| Company: | National Education Corp. |
| Settlement: | $11,500,000 |
| Filed: | 1989 |
| Court: | US District Court of Central California |
| Company: | Phillips Petroleum |
| Settlement: | $6,700,000 |
| Filed: | 1985 |
| Court: | US District Court of Delaware |
| Company: | Houston Oil Trust, et al. |
| Settlement: | approximately $45 million |
| Filed: | 1982 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern Texas |
| Company: | Beverly Enterprises |
| Settlement: | $9,900,000 |
| Filed: | 1988 |
| Court: | US District Court of Central California |
| Company: | Tenneco Inc. |
| Settlement: | $50,000,000 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern Texas |
| Company: | Telerate, Inc. |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
Telerate, Inc. Shareholders Litigation. An action challenging corporate takeover, resulting in acquiror paying additional $3 per share.
| Company: | Henley Manufacturing Corporation |
| Settlement: | A class settlement of $10 per share increase in tender offer price, a $26 million benefit, plus additional therapeutic benefits |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
| Company: | Kaypro Corporation |
| Settlement: | $9,250,000 |
| Filed: | 1984 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern California |
| Company: | Lorimar Telepictures Corp. |
| Settlement: | $6,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1988 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Rand v. Lorimar Telepictures Corp, an open market securities fraud action which settled for $6 million.
| Company: | Dingman |
| Settlement: | $52,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1987 |
| Court: | US Superior Court of California |
Grobow v. Dingman, whose settlement, comprised of monetary and equitable relief, valued by experts at in excess of $52 million, of federal and state class and derivative actions was approved in September 1987.
| Company: | E.F. Hutton Banking Practices |
| Settlement: | $8,000,000 |
| Company: | Shumway |
| Settlement: | valued at in excess of $20 million |
| Court: | US Superior Court of California |
| Company: | Saxon |
| Settlement: | $20,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1982 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
| Company: | Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. |
| Settlement: | approximately $9 million |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
| Company: | Scharffenberger |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
Bacine v. Scharffenberger, in which a settlement resulted in a reduction of $10 million in "golden parachute" payments in connection with the liquidation of City Investing Co.
| Company: | Itel |
| Settlement: | $40,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1979 |
| Court: | US District Court of Northern California |
| Company: | United States Surgical Corporation |
| Settlement: | $6,100,000 |
| Filed: | 1983 |
| Court: | US District Court of Connecticut |
| Company: | Digital Equipment Corporation |
| Settlement: | $9,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1983 |
| Court: | US District Court of Massachussetts |
| Company: | American Bankers Insurance Group, Inc. |
| Filed: | 1999 |
In Taylor v. American Bankers Insurance Group, Inc., the Firm successfully defended against an appeal by defendants of the certification of a nationwide class on behalf of consumers who alleged that defendants had violated §§349 and 350 of the General Business Law by misleading consumers about the purchase of insurance and improperly denying insurance claims. The Firm achieved a complete recovery for class members as defendants agreed to pay class members' disputed coverage claims in full, as well as revise their solicitations to prevent a recurrence.
| Company: | Iomega Corp. |
| Filed: | 1999 |
| Court: | US Superior Court of New York City |
Purchasers of computer storage devices alleged that the product could not read certain tapes that it was advertised as being capable of reading, and that they were improperly charged for customer assistance calls. The Firm achieved a settlement that provided a software fix to correct the problem with reading the tapes or, if not corrected, ultimately provided for a return of the product; the Firm also obtained a refund of 50% of the charges for the customer assistance calls.
| Company: | American Telephone & Telegraph Company |
| Settlement: | $85-90 million |
| Filed: | 1995 |
| Court: | New Jersey Superior Court |
In the largest class action ever brought in New Jersey State Court, the action, based upon AT&T's marketing and sales of a telephone system that it advertised as well suited to small businesses because of its "conference call" features, revealed that the phone system did not function as advertised. The participants to calls could not hear each other because the conference feature lacked amplification. This litigation resulted in a settlement valued by the Court at $85-90 million. At the conclusion of the case, the Court noted the complexity and difficulty of the issues involved and favorably commented that, "[i]f not for the skill and experience of class counsel, a settlement may not have been reached or, if it had been reached, may have resulted in a significantly diminished recovery for the class."
| Company: | HIP |
| Filed: | 1997 |
| Court: | New York Court of Appeals |
In a unanimous decision obtained by the Firm, the New York Court of Appeals, New York's highest court, upheld a class action complaint on behalf of insureds who had been denied medical insurance coverage. The Firm subsequently obtained partial summary judgment against HIP for breach of HIP's contract with its health insurance subscribers for failing to reimburse the subscribers for anesthesia-related expenses in conjunction with surgical procedures performed in New York State since June 7, 1993. Ultimately, a settlement was reached which paid members of the class 100% of their damages.
| Company: | Empire Blue Cross-Blue Shield |
| Settlement: | $8,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1988 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Participants in a Blue Cross Blue Shield medical insurance program alleged that the program breached its contract with customers by paying subscribers amounts below the "usual and customary" rates that it represented it would pay in its contract of insurance. The action was ultimately settled with Empire agreeing to reimburse subscribers an additional $8 million.
| Company: | Ocean Shipping |
| Settlement: | over $50,000,000 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
In the Ocean Shipping Antitrust Litigation case, Wolf Popper was co-lead counsel and recovered over $50 million on behalf of transatlantic shippers of goods who brought an action against the leading carriers of containerized shipping in the United States-Europe trade for conspiracy to fix the charges made for shipping services.
| Company: | Wholesale Tobacco Distributors |
| Company: | Milk Antitrust Litigation |
| Filed: | 1981 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
| Company: | Bread Antitrust Litigation |
| Filed: | 1985 |
| Court: | US District Court of Eastern New York |
| Company: | Shopping Carts Antitrust Litigation |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
This antitrust litigation resulted in multi-million dollar settlements in 1983 and 1984.
| Company: | Wiring Device |
| Court: | US District Court of Eastern New York |
Chief Judge Weinstein described counsel for the plaintiffs as "outstanding and skillful").
| Company: | Exxon Valdez |
| Settlement: | $5,000,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1989 |
| Court: | US Superior Court of Alaska |
In the Exxon Valdez oil spill case, the jury awarded judgment for the plaintiffs in the amount of $5 billion.
| Company: | Asbestos School |
| Filed: | 1983 |
| Court: | US District Court of Eastern Pennsylvania |
| Company: | BP America, Inc. |
| Filed: | 1990 |
| Court: | US District Court of Central California |
| Company: | Johns-Manville Corporation |
| Filed: | 1982 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
| Company: | A. H. Robins, Inc. |
| Filed: | 1977 |
| Company: | an international airline |
The Firm served as arbitration counsel in 1997, 1998, and 1999 in several extensive commercial arbitrations on behalf of an international airline.
| Company: | E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co. |
| Court: | Delaware Chancery Court |
In Citron v. E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., in Delaware Chancery Court, the Vice-Chancellor complimented plaintiffs' counsel "for the able way in which they presented the case," their "well-done" pre-trial briefs, and the "good job" done.
| Company: | Westside Bancorporation, Inc. |
| Court: | US District Court of Western Washington |
Settled mid-way through trial in Seattle, Washington.
| Company: | Sambo's |
| Settlement: | $7,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1979 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Firm was co-trial counsel for a plaintiff class in Kreindler v. Sambo's, which was settled during trial for $7 million.
| Company: | Solitron Devices, Inc. |
| Filed: | 1975 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Co-counsel for the plaintiff class in the successful trial of Sirota v. Solitron Devices, Inc., a complex securities fraud class action prosecuted under §10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. After an eleven-day trial, the jury brought in a verdict for the plaintiff class on all issues of liability and damages which was sustained on appeal.
| Company: | Centronics Data Computer Corp. |
| Filed: | 1985 |
| Court: | US District Court of New Hampshire |
Baum v. Centronics Data Computer Corp., settled after trial had commenced in New Hampshire.
| Company: | Exide Corp. |
| Settlement: | $10,250,000 |
| Filed: | 1999 |
| Court: | US District Court of Eastern Michigan |
In approving the $10.25 million settlement of the In re Exide Corp. Sec. Litig., the Honorable George Caram Steeh complimented the Firm for its diligence and skill, saying:
The court is satisfied indeed that the settlement that was reached in arm's length bargaining, that was undertaken only after very thorough preparation on the part of plaintiff's counsel. That the counsel itself was extremely competent and considerable experience in pursuing such matters. . . .* * *
So the court is satisfied that the attorneys on both sides of this litigation should be commended for their effort and professionalism in developing and presenting the issues and for their common sense in arriving at the settlement as it has been presented to the court for confirmation.
| Company: | Marketspan Corporation |
| Filed: | 1999 |
| Court: | US Superior Court of New York |
In the In re Marketspan Corporation /LILCO Shareholder Litigation, Justice Ute Wolff Lally commended the Firm when he preliminarily approved a proposed settlement, stating:
Let me first state that having had the stipulation of settlement prior to today, I have, of course, perused it at length, and I want to thank and I want to commend the executive committee and the head law firm, Wolf Popper, in adhering to the timetable which this Court has set in the various orders that have been issued and in completing the discovery and the complex negotiations in accordance with the Court's order. The court appreciates that because it was an enormously complex litigation, and I certainly commend you for reaching this agreement.
| Company: | American Stock Exchange |
| Filed: | 1999 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
In approving the proposed settlement of the litigation over the merger of the American Stock Exchange and the NASD, Judge Denny Chin stated in Philipson v. American Stock Exchange:
I've considered the papers and what I have heard today, and I find that the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate. . . . The recovery is substantial. There is the $30 million for the seat market program. . . . There is the potential revenue sharing, which I think at a reasonable estimate would be $20.7 million at least, . . . .
So the benefits of the proposed settlement are substantial. * * * I think that the benefits of the proposed settlement compare very well to any conceivable reasonable potential recovery. * * * There are very experienced and very good counsel on both sides. The negotiations were difficult and went on for quite a long time. * * * So, having considered all those factors, I conclude that the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate and is approved.
* * *Terrific job on both sides.
| Company: | Cognitronics Securities Corp. |
| Filed: | 1993 |
| Court: | US District Court of Connecticut |
Judge Donna F. Martinez complimented the Firm when she approved the settlement of a securities fraud action in Germano v. Cognitronics Securities Corp., stating:
Your presentations. . .were extraordinary – extraordinarily thorough and highly expert. . . .
* * *The issues presented were complicated. They were difficult, and as we've all said more than once now, they were bitterly and expertly fought.* * *You've ended a long piece of litigation. I know that there was hard work involved not only in the litigation, but a lot of hard work and considerable number of hours that went into the efforts to resolve the case, and you're all to be commended for your very, very excellent representation of your respective clients.
| Company: | Caremark International, Inc. |
| Settlement: | $25,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1994 |
In a securities fraud action against Caremark International, Inc. arising out the company's failure to disclose violations of state fraud statutes, the Firm served as Co-Lead Counsel for plaintiffs and recovered $25 million on behalf of defrauded investors. The Court complimented plaintiffs' counsel on their handling of the case, stating:
Congratulations * * *I know [this case] was a complex piece of litigation. * * * thank you very much for your efforts. I think the class and the defense were very well represented.
| Company: | Store Advertising |
| Settlement: | $9,250,000 |
| Filed: | 1990 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
In the investor actions arising out of the failed public offering involving In-Store Advertising in which the Firm was co-lead counsel, Judge Peter K. Leisure, in approving a settlement of $9.25 million, stated at the settlement hearing held on December 18, 1996:
Now, having reviewed the excellent work of counsel with regard to the preparation of the papers, and the research that was done, and having conducted independent research on the law, I am fully satisfied with the quality of the lawyers' work in this matter.
| Company: | McDonnell Douglas Capital Income Fund-I |
| Settlement: | $16,100,000 |
| Filed: | 1990 |
Wolf Popper was lead counsel in Carpi v. McDonnell Douglas Capital Income Fund-I, where $16.1 million in aggregate economic benefits or 95% of the class damages was recovered for the class. Judge Cannella praised lead counsel in a decision dated January 21, 1994, as follows:
Plaintiffs' lead counsel has at all times demonstrated to this Court the highest caliber of representation, measurable both in quantitative terms (i.e., the benefits of the settlement to the class members), and in the professionalism, the timeliness, and the thoroughness of lead counsel's written submissions.
| Company: | Valley National Bank of Arizona |
| Settlement: | $10,800,000 |
| Filed: | 1989 |
| Court: | US District Court of Arizona |
Wolf Popper was co-lead counsel in investor actions brought against Valley National Bank of Arizona. Judge Robert C. Broomfield stated in approving a $10.8 million settlement on January 31, 1994:
I commend counsel, particularly counsel who litigated this matter, on the quality of their representation of their respective counsel. The quality of representation was very high on behalf of all parties.
| Company: | Salton/Maxim |
| Filed: | 1991 |
| Court: | US District Court of Northern Illinois |
Judge James F. Holderman complimented counsel for the quality of their efforts in the Salton/Maxim case, in which Wolf Popper was Co-Lead Counsel, at the hearing approving the settlement and awarding counsel fees, the Court stated:
I want to not only compliment you lawyers for the professionalism that you showed in the course of reaching this compromise resolution, but I want to compliment you on the professionalism that you showed during the course of the litigation. This was a hard fought litigation. It was well briefed. The issues were presented crisply. . . . [A]s a judge presiding over this case, it was a pleasure to preside over it because of the skill and the quality of the lawyering on everyone's part in connection with this case.
| Company: | Prime Motor Inns |
| Settlement: | $21,600,000 |
| Filed: | 1990 |
| Court: | US District Court of New Jersey |
Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise stated at the February 3, 1993 hearing at which he approved the $21.6 million settlement in In re Prime Motor Inns Shareholder Litig., Master File No. 90-87 (DRD) (D.N.J.):
The plaintiffs' attorneys have performed their work aggressively, skillfully and with good effect. I do not detect any duplication of work....The attorneys have earned generous compensation.
| Company: | Wedtech |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
Judge Leonard B. Sand of the Southern District of New York, in approving the settlement and counsel's fee application (in which the Firm was Chair of the Plaintiffs' Executive and Scheduling Committees in the consolidated litigation), stated:
My observation has been that this litigation has at all times been conducted at a very high-skilled professional level. I have had no sense in this case of make-work activity or any sense that the matter was not pursued by all parties diligently but not excessively . . . .
| Company: | Gulf Oil/Cities Service Tender Offer |
| Settlement: | $34,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1982 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
In the Gulf Oil/Cities Service Tender Offer litigation, where Wolf Popper served as Plaintiffs' Lead Settlement Counsel and as a member of Plaintiffs' Executive Committee and in which a settlement of $34 million was achieved only after the case was fully prepared for trial, the Honorable Michael B. Mukasey stated to the Wolf Popper partner in charge of the case, at a hearing held on January 3, 1992, "to the extent you have fiduciary obligations, you have discharged them magnificently in this case. You have gotten the best settlement that you can negotiate for your client." Judge Mukasey further stated in his Opinion and Order approving the settlement and awarding counsel fees:
[P]laintiffs' counsel] did all the work on their own....class counsel consistently have been skillful, resourceful and diligent without also being captious -- no mean feat. They invested time and money in this case, and well deserve the payment they request.
| Company: | International Systems & Controls |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern Texas |
In the International Systems & Controls Sec. Litig. case, Judge Black stated at the conclusion of the action that the quality of the plaintiffs' lawyers was "extraordinary."
| Company: | Stauffer Chemical Co. |
| Settlement: | $11,600,000 |
| Filed: | 1984 |
| Court: | US District Court of Connecticut |
In Seidman v. Stauffer Chemical Co., at the conclusion of the case, Chief Judge Daly remarked, in approving the $11.6 million settlement, that plaintiffs' co-lead counsel had acted throughout the litigation "...in accord with the highest standards of the bar, and it was a pleasure to deal with you and to listen to you, and to review your work...".
| Company: | Electro-Catheter Corporation |
| Settlement: | $4,250,000 |
| Filed: | 1987 |
| Court: | US District Court of New Jersey |
Judge Nicholas H. Politan stated at the hearing approving the $4.25 million settlement in the Electro-Catheter Corporation Sec. Litig., in which the Firm was co-lead counsel:
I'm satisfied that counsel in this case are highly competent, very skilled in this very specialized area and were at all times during the course of the litigation that I participated in, which was perhaps the major portion of the Court litigation here, always well prepared, well spoken, and knew their stuff and they were a credit to their profession. They are the top of the line. It is good to see top-of-the-line people come in here and top-of-the-line people should be paid top-of-the-line fees. . . . I'm very satisfied with counsel. . . . I compliment them. . . .
| Company: | Saxon |
| Settlement: | over $18,000,000 |
| Filed: | 1981 |
| Court: | US District Court of Southern New York |
At the settlement hearing held on September 30, 1985 in the Saxon Sec. Litig., in which the Firm served as co-lead counsel and achieved a recovery of over $18 million, Judge Mary Johnson Lowe praised the quality of work performed in the case:
I have never had the pleasure of working with such an outstanding group of attorneys. . . .
* * *
We had claims which aggregated many times the value of what was available, and I think you were all just superb, and from this Court to all of the lawyers who participated you have my admiration, my thanks -- and I don't know what other accolades I can give you other than that, but that is the way I feel about what happened here, and I am very proud to be a lawyer to be associated with you.
|
__________________________________________________
Home
| Stock Investigation Guide
| Portfolio Monitoring
|
