Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
our-team
practice-areas
investment-products

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)

EpiPen

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

BioProfit

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