The Law Firm of Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd. Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against Van der Moolen Holding N.V.Business Editors/Legal Writers NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 21, 2003 Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd., a law firm with offices in New York New York, state, United States New York, Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of and Chicago, announces that a lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court United States District Court In the U.S., any of the 94 trial courts of general jurisdiction in the federal judicial system. Each state, as well as the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, has at least one federal district court. for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of Van der Moolen Van der Moolen is a Dutch equity trading firm, with its headquarters located in Amsterdam. They are mainly active in the United States and in Europe, particularly in the Netherlands, France, Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Holding N.V. ("Van der Moolen" or the "Company") (NYSE NYSE See: New York Stock Exchange :VDM See Virtual DOS Machine and CGM. 1. VDM - Vienna Definition Method 2. VDM - Virtual Device Metafile. ) between October 18, 2001 and October 15, 2003, inclusive, (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed against Van der Moolen, Friedrich M.J. Bottcher, Frank F. Dorjee, James P. Cleaver, Jr., and Casper F. Rondeltap. If you are a member of this class and wish to view a copy of a complaint and join this class action, please e-mail us at investorrelations@laskyrifkind.com and request a copy of the complaint and a plaintiff certification. If you are a member of the Class, you may move the Court no later than December 19, 2003 to serve as a lead plaintiff for the Class. Any member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. However, if you choose to remain an absent class member, unless and until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel. The complaint alleges that Van der Moolen, during the class period, repeatedly violated its duty of negative obligation, or the duty to hang back and not trade for the specialist firm's own account when public investor orders exist. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company's statements concerning its financial results were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose or misrepresented that Van der Moolen engaged in the illegal practice of "front running" trades at the NYSE, which allowed them to act upon non-public information, that Van der Moolen "traded ahead" of customer orders by putting its own interest ahead of investors, and that it improperly recognized revenue from the illegal scheme under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles The standard accounting rules, regulations, and procedures used by companies in maintaining their financial records. Generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) provide companies and accountants with a consistent set of guidelines that cover both broad accounting (GAAP GAAP See: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles GAAP See generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). ). On April 17, 2003, the NYSE issued a statement wherein where·in adv. In what way; how: Wherein have we sinned? conj. 1. In which location; where: the country wherein those people live. 2. it disclosed that it had begun an investigation of the specialist firms of the NYSE. On this news Van der Moolen ADRs fell 4.8%, or $0.52 per share, to close at $10.19 per share. On April 18, 2003 Bloomberg reported that the SEC had intensified its inquiry into the NYSE specialist firms, like Van der Moolen. On news of this, Van der Moolen ADRs fell 4.4%, or $0.62 per share, to close at $13.35 per share. Lastly, on October 16, 2003, the NYSE announced that the NYSE Enforcement Division had decided to bring disciplinary action against Van der Moolen and the other specialist firms. Additionally, the NYSE stated that for the three-year period ending December 31, 2002, Van der Moolen disadvantaged customers who entered orders via the NYSE's Designated Order Turnaround System Designated order turnaround system (DOT) Computerized order entry system that allows orders to buy or sell large baskets of stock to be transmitted immediately to the specialist on the exchange, where execution will occur quickly, depending on the basket size. ("DOT") through alleged "interpositioning" resulting in losses to customers of approximately $10 million. News of this shocked the market. Van der Moolen ADRs fell 14.7%, or $1.45 per share, to close at $9.05 per share on very high volume. If you bought Van der Moolen securities between October 18, 2001 to October 15, 2003, inclusive, and would like to obtain information about the lawsuit, then you are invited to call (800) 495-1868 to speak with an advisor. |
|
||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion