Emerson Poynter LLP

Securities Purchaser Class Actions

The federal securities laws are designed to promote honesty and integrity within the securities markets which depends upon full and fair disclosure of all material facts regarding a company, thereby creating a "level playing field" for investors. As a result, if full and fair disclosure of all material facts is not made, an action can sometimes be brought against the company, certain of its officers or directors or the company's advisors, for violations of the federal securities laws. In such instances, a class action lawsuit can be brought by an individual or an institutional investor, on behalf of the investor and all investors similarly situated who suffered damages as a result of purchasing the securities of the company between the time in which the first false or misleading statement is made and the time in which the truth is disclosed, whether it be disclosed by the company or another party, a time period known as the "class period."

Emerson Poynter LLP is currently prosecuting numerous securities class action lawsuits on behalf of lead plaintiffs as the court appointed lead or co-lead counsel in federal courts throughout the US and Canada. A majority of these cases are against high-profile companies which receive almost daily attention in our nation's newspapers and investor publications. To find out more about the securities class actions we are currently prosecuting, please click on the Cases section of this website.

Shareholder Derivative Actions

Emerson Poynter is at the forefront of improvements in corporate governance. The firm is very active in working with shareholders to bring suits on behalf of companies derivatively against corporate boards, company officers, auditors, and others who are involved in malfeasance and/or fraud that damages a company.

These suits seek to impose corporate governance reforms aimed at protecting shareholders and eliminating corporate waste and abuse. For example, the Firm's lawyers served as Co-Lead Derivative Counsel in the Federman v. Artz derivative action brought on behalf of Computer Associates in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York. This action was brought against the Computer Associates board of directors and led to the resignation of the Company's CFO, the resignation of two other senior financial officers, and the adoption of certain corporate governance measures that Computer Associates has represented as the "gold standard" of governance reform. The Firm's lawyers were Co-Lead Counsel in the In Re Nicor, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois County Department, Chancery Division. This action was brought against Nicor's board of directors and its settlement resulted in significant corporate governance improvements at Nicor. In 2005, the Firm's lawyers were Co-Lead Counsel with Lerach, Coughlin, Stoia, Geller, Rudman, & Robbins in the In Re Cryolife Derivative Litigation pending in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia. The settlement of this action resulted in wide-sweeping and significant corporate governance improvements at Cryolife. The Firm is currently prosecuting numerous other shareholder derivative actions in state and federal courts across the country.

ERISA Litigation / Consumer Fraud

Emerson Poynter LLP is at the forefront of protecting the rights of employees and consumers. The firm's ERISA litigation department specializes in breach of fiduciary actions, which are brought when a company has breached its duty in the administration of an employee benefit plan. For example, a company sponsoring a 401(k) plan for the benefit of its employees has a fiduciary duty to ensure that employee contributions are directed to appropriate and prudent investment vehicles. This duty is frequently breached where the company deems investment in its own common stock appropriate, despite having access to information which clearly indicates otherwise. This conflict of interest can be devastating to employees, who often depend on their 401(k) accounts as the principal source of retirement income.

Consumer fraud describes a wide range of improper practices involved in the advertising, marketing and/or sale of goods or services. Consumer fraud class actions are initiated, for example, when a company overcharges or improperly charges consumers for goods or services, or runs deceptive or misleading ads for its products. Companies also commit consumer fraud when they interpret a contract or agreement in a manner that unfairly disadvantages customers. In past years, our firm has taken a prominent role in prosecuting claims against credit card companies, life insurance companies and private mortgage insurers, which have resulted in significant monetary recoveries and changes in corporate policies on a class-wide basis.

If you believe that a company has mismanaged assets in an employee benefit plan, including a 401(k) or pension plan, or that you may have been a victim of consumer fraud, you should contact us either by phone or email or by clicking here. We will investigate your claims thoroughly and advise you of your rights without any cost or obligation to you. If we decide to prosecute your case, it will be done on a contingency fee basis, meaning that the only way we get paid is if we successfully prosecute your claims, either at trial or through settlement.

Mass Tort Litigation

At Emerson Poynter, we take great pride in our Mass Torts Department, which has quickly emerged as a powerful force for consumers and victims harmed by pharmaceutical drugs and medical device products. Over the years pharmaceutical companies have made increasingly significant efforts to receive quicker approval for new drug applications. Seizing the opportunity created by a public outcry for more products to cure illnesses, pharmaceutical companies lobbied for and crafted legislation to allow for the fast tracking of drugs. This legislation, The Prescription Drug User Fee Act, has resulted in a shortening of the time period pharmaceutical companies must undertake to review drugs before seeking approval. A natural result of the shortened time period is that the rush to approval sacrifices the careful scrutiny over safety that a drug must have before being approved. As a result many drugs that received approval in the late 1990s have either been withdrawn or are being petitioned for removal from the market. These drugs include: Baycol, Propulsid, Rezulin and Meridia. Additionally, the number of consumers injured by pharmaceutical products has risen since the change to fast tracking drugs.

The attorneys in our Mass Torts Department work diligently to represent individuals harmed by the pharmaceutical and medical device industry, and in being among a small group of trial lawyers that are willing to fight big pharmaceutical companies. To successfully pursue such cases the firm has brought together a team of experienced and dedicated trial attorneys. Additionally, our Mass Torts attorneys continue to keep a vigilant eye on the actions of the pharmaceutical industry, and its interaction with the Food and Drug Administration. All too often, pharmaceutical companies continue to fail to comply with FDA requirements to investigate or warn about drug problems. Until satisfactory regulation of this industry is once again imposed, the only corrective deterrent for this industry's behavior will come at the hands of the individuals and trial lawyers who are willing to stand up to big pharmaceutical companies and hold them accountable. Emerson Poynter has earned a national reputation as a leader in the area of serving the needs of victims of fraud. The Mass Tort Department represents just one more way in which the attorneys and staff at Emerson Poynter protect victims.