Kaplan Fox Files Securities Class Action

Class Action News

Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP has filed a class action suit against Jon S. Corzine, J. Randy MacDonald, Henri J. Steenkamp and certain other individuals that alleges violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of purchasers of the securities of MF Global Holdings Ltd. during the period May 20, 2010 through October 28, 2011, inclusive, including investors who purchased MF Global common stock previously traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "MF" and purchasers of the Company's debt securities.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. A copy of the complaint may be obtained from Kaplan Fox or the Court.

The complaint alleges that in March 2010, Corzine, a former CEO of Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. and former Governor of New Jersey, became Chairman and CEO of MF Global and that after Corzine became Chairman and CEO of MF Global, the Company increased its risk and used its own money to trade, including making investments in European sovereign debt that has plummeted in value. Reportedly, Corzine's strategy was to transform the Company from a futures broker into a boutique investment bank.

The complaint further alleges that Corzine's push into more risky and principal trading with the Company's money was central to MF Global's profit-growing plan and transformation, and that Corzine and the other defendants represented that they could grow and transform the business without taking on excessive risk, while maintaining adequate capital and liquidity. Further, it is alleged that while making this transformation, Corzine and the other defendants failed to disclose that the Company was undercapitalized, exposed to excessive risk due to massive bets on debt issued by certain European governments, and did not have proper risk controls in place to manage these risks.

If you are a member of the proposed Class, you may move the court no later than January 3, 2012 to serve as a lead plaintiff for the Class. You need not seek to become a lead plaintiff in order to share in any possible recovery.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of the Class and is represented by Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP. Our firm, with offices in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago and New Jersey, has many years of experience in prosecuting investor class actions and actions involving financial fraud. For more information about Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP, or to review a copy of the complaint filed in this action, you may visit our website at www.kaplanfox.com.

Related listings

  • Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action Lawsuit

    Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action Lawsuit

    Class Action News 11/14/2011

    Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against Human Genome Sciences, Inc., certain of the Company's senior officers and directors and GlaxoSmithKline plc in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The action for violations of t...

  • SearchMedia Announces Settlement on Securities Class Action

    SearchMedia Announces Settlement on Securities Class Action

    Class Action News 11/11/2011

    SearchMedia Holdings Limited, one of China's leading nationwide multi-platform media companies, today announced that it reached a tentative partial settlement agreement for a securities class action lawsuit pending against the Company and a number of...

  • Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action

    Pomerantz Law Firm Has Filed a Class Action

    Class Action News 11/10/2011

    Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Diamond Foods, Inc. and certain of its officers. The class action (CV 11 5399 RS) filed in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, is on beh...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

St Peters, MO Professional License Attorney Attorney John Lynch has been the go-to choice for many professionals facing administrative sanction. >> read