Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages

Case Information

Endo International

This class action brought pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 alleges that Endo International and a team of underwriters participated in the offering of new securities after having provided the public with false and misleading information related to the company’s prospects going forward. In particular, Mississippi, which purchased Endo shares in a secondary offering, alleges that defendants mispresented demand for its pain and controlled substances products, engaged in “trade loading” to artificially advance the recognition of revenue, and overpaid for an acquisition.

Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi v. Endo International PLC, Case No. 2017-02081-MJ (Chester County, PA 2017)

Hernia Mesh

A number of lawsuits have been brought against manufacturers of hernia mesh products. Hernia mesh is a medical device that is used to provide additional support to weakened or damaged tissues. Plaintiffs in these lawsuits claim that the mesh products were defectively designed and tested before they were implanted into the victims’ bodies. These cases are being pursued under product liability theories. Patients who have been injured by these products are filing individual lawsuits that have been consolidated for pretrial purposes in various jurisdictions across the country.

In re: Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products liability Litigation 1:17-md-02782-RWS; In re: Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation 16-md-2753 LM.

MSU/Larry Nassar

Hundreds of young women have brought civil lawsuits against Michigan State University and Dr. Larry Nassar alleging that Nassar sexually assaulted them under the guise of medical treatment. The victims claim that MSU failed to follow-up on numerous reports of its employee’s abuse. These cases are consolidated in the US District Court for the Western District of Michigan under 1:17-cv-00029-GJQ-ESC (Lead Case). Over one hundred Jane Doe claimants have simultaneously filed cases against MSU in Michigan’s Court of Claims: Jane L.B. Doe et al v Michigan State University, 18-000176-MZ


The Firm has filed a class action lawsuit to recover hundreds of millions of dollars improperly paid as a result of the creation, maintenance, and concealment of a multi-tiered fraudulent scheme to deceive consumers and artificially restrain competition in connection with the marketing and sale of the EpiPen epinephrine injector. The suit names Pfizer, the manufacturer of the device, and Mylan, responsible for its marketing. By raising the Epipen price, selling the Epipen in two-packs, and cutting the expiration period in half, these sales practices make the Epipen cost prohibitive and too expensive for many consumers.

In re Mylan Epipen Litigation, Case No. 16-CV-2711-JWL (D. Kan. 2016).

Investment Loss


The Firm is prosecuting a class action lawsuit on behalf of victims of a $145 million fraudulent real estate investment program called BioProfit funds, whose perpetrators were charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission with organizing a Ponzi scheme that defrauded hundreds of investors. The defendant in the case is a bank that stands accused of making its accounts available to the scheme, helping the BioProfit promoters perpetrate their fraud, and improperly transferring the investors’ money to the fraudulent program.

Liu et al. v. Wilmington Trust Company, Case No. 14-cv-6631 (W.D.N.Y. 2014).

First Nationle Solutions

The Firm has filed FINRA arbitration claims on behalf of a group of retirees who lost millions of their life savings in a fraudulent investment programs perpetrated by a group of former investment professionals, including First Nationle Solutions. The alleged fraudsters have been sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission and accused of organizing a Ponzi scheme. The investors, represented by the Firm, sued the brokerage firm that employed their investment professional, who allegedly improperly recruited them to invest with the fraudsters.

Turner, et al. v. Independent Financial Group, Case No. 18-03885