Jul 28, 2017 | Securities Class Action Archive
Class Action Investigation – United Therapeutics Corporation
A class action investigation is being conducted by Kehoe Law Firm’s securities attorneys on behalf of United Therapeutics Corporation (“United Therapeutics”) (NASDAQ: UTHR) investors concerning the Company and its officers’ possible violations of federal securities laws.
On July 27, 2017, United Thereapeutics disclosed that it recorded a $210 million accrual relating to a potential settlement in connection with a DOJ investigation into the Company’s possible violations of the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute and the Federal False Claims Act. On this news, United Therapeutics’ stock price fell approximately 5% during intraday trading on July 27, 2017.
United Therapeutics 10-Q Filing Disclosure
United Therapeutics disclosed the following in a recent 10-Q filing:
In May 2016, [UTHR] received a subpoena from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting documents regarding [its] support of 501(c)(3) organizations that provide financial assistance to patients. Other companies have received similar inquiries. The DOJ is investigating whether that support may violate the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute and the Federal False Claims Act. Although [UTHR] believe[s] that [they] would successfully defend any action the DOJ might bring, [UTHR is] engaged in settlement negotiations with the DOJ as part of [UTHR’s] efforts to resolve the matter. However, [UTHR] cannot provide assurances that [its] efforts to reach a settlement with the DOJ will be successful or, if they are, what the timing or terms of any such settlement would be. [UTHR] expect[s] any such settlement would include a settlement payment to the government, and it may also include non-monetary obligations, such as [UTHR] entering into a corporate integrity agreement (CIA). [UTHR] may be required to incur significant future costs to comply with the CIA. If [UTHR] do[es] not reach a settlement with the DOJ, [UTHR] may incur material losses in connection with the defense or resolution of any subsequent litigation with the government. During the second quarter of 2017, [UTHR] recorded a $210.0 million accrual relating to this matter. The accrual was recorded in other current liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets and as an operating expense on the consolidated statements of operations. [UTHR is] unable to estimate the amount of reasonably possible losses in excess of the amount accrued because resolution of this matter through settlement is subject to a range of complex factors. Any actions taken by the DOJ, including settlement, could result in negative publicity or otherwise harm our reputation, reduce demand for [its] products and/or reduce coverage of [its] products, including by federal health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and state health care programs. If any or all of these events occur, [UTHR] business, prospects and stock price could be materially and adversely affected. Because matters such as this are inherently unpredictable, the ultimate outcome of this matter, including the amount of any loss, may differ materially from [UTHR’s] estimate.
United Therapeutics Shareholders
If you purchased or otherwise acquired shares of United Therapeutics, have information or have any questions concerning United Therapeutics’ disclosure or your potential legal rights, please fill out the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Jul 26, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Mercedes (Daimler), Volkswagen (Audi, Porsche) & BMW
Collusive Emissions-Reducing Practices Since the 1990’s Alleged
On July 24, 2017, The Wall Street Journal reported that
[t]he latest allegation is that Volkswagen, Porsche and Audi-all owned by the Volkswagen Group-together with Mercedes-maker Daimler and BMW have engaged in collusive practices since the 1990s, including on emissions-reducing technology linked to the VW fraud revealed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 2015. The European Union’s top antitrust regulator has confirmed that it is investigating the industry following a tipoff from VW last year. More than (EURO)11 billion ($12.8 billion) has been wiped off the combined market value of the three listed groups since the weekly magazine Der Spiegel published details of what it labeled “the cartel” on Friday.
The Der Spiegel report describes how teams from each of the big five German car makers met to coordinate answers to questions posed by new technology or regulations. Notably, a crucial component for the reduction of noxious nitrogen-oxide emissions from diesel engines was allegedly downscaled for commercial reasons. This eventually led VW and Audi to pass tougher U.S. tests by cheating.
Diesel Emissions – Secret Cartel Allegedly Formed
On July 24, 2017, The Verge reported that
. . . Der Spiegel published an explosive report alleging that the major German automakers formed a secret cartel in the 1990s to collude on diesel emissions. These companies, including Volkswagen, Audi, BMW, Porsche, and Daimler, met in secret working groups to discuss “the technology, costs, suppliers, and even the exhaust gas purification of its diesel vehicles,” the German weekly reported. The meetings were disclosed to German competition officials in letters from VW and Daimler and viewed by Der Spiegel.
The Verge further reported that
[t]he secret meetings “laid the basis” for the 2015 diesel emission cheating scandal, in which VW was caught installing secret software in more than half a million vehicles sold in the US that it used to fool exhaust emissions tests. The admission of cheating ultimately cost the automaker tens of billions of dollars in fines and legal fees, making it one of the most expensive corporate scandals in history.
Years earlier, VW participated in dozens of secret meetings with its competitors, involving over 200 employees in up to 60 working groups, on how to meet increasingly tough emissions criteria in diesel vehicles. The automakers may have colluded to fix prices of a diesel emission treatment called AdBlue through these working groups, Der Spiegel says. Specifically, VW (which owns Porsche and Audi), Daimler (which owns Mercedes-Benz and Smart), and BMW allegedly agreed to use AdBlue tanks that were too small. AdBlue is a liquid solution used to counteract a vehicle’s emissions.
. . .
More recently, Mercedes Benz-parent company Daimler has recalled some 3 million cars for a software update designed to reduce diesel emissions. The German government ordered Daimler to appear before a commission after local media reported that prosecutors were investigating possible emissions cheating by the auto giant.
Meanwhile, VW subsidiary Audi on Friday recalled up to 850,000 vehicles fitted with a similar software update. The news of the recalls, and of the widening scope of the scandal, comes as many global car companies have announced expanded plans for hybrid and electric vehicles.
Volkswagen, Daimler & BMW – Decades of Collusion Alleged
On July 25, 2017, The New York Times reported that
[o]n Saturday, the German magazine Der Spiegel reported that for decades Volkswagen, Daimler and BMW had colluded to hold down the price of key technologies, including emissions equipment. Among other things, Der Spiegel said, the carmakers agreed in 2006 to limit the size of tanks used to hold a liquid required to neutralize nitrogen oxide fumes.
At least for Volkswagen and its Audi division, the tanks were not big enough to adequately purify the emissions without frequent refills.
Volkswagen and Audi have admitted in court documents that rather than inconvenience owners, they rationed the fluid and allowed the cars to spew more nitrogen oxides than allowed. Daimler and BMW have denied wrongdoing.
Though unproven, the accusations of collusion among the automakers are being taken seriously. The European Commission and the Federal Cartel Office in Germany said they would look into the Spiegel report.
Diesel Emissions – Daimler Summoned To Appear Before A Commission
On July 13, 2017, CNN Money reported that
[t]he German government summoned Daimler to appear before a commission on Thursday after local media reported that prosecutors were investigating possible cheating on emissions tests.
German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported on Wednesday that prosecutors were investigating two engines used in over 1 million cars sold in the U.S. and Europe.
CNN Money also reported that
[t]he commission that Daimler . . . will appear before Thursday was established in 2015 to investigate Volkswagen’s . . . diesel scandal.
The German automaker has admitted to fitting as many as 11 million diesel vehicles worldwide with software that could cheat nitrogen oxide emissions tests.
On July 13, 2017, Fortune reported that
[t]he committee of German lawmakers investigating the Volkswagen emissions scandal has summoned German carmaker Daimler for an extraordinary meeting to address allegations it sold cars with excessive emissions.
Germany’s Sueddeutsche Zeitung, citing a search warrant issued by a Stuttgart court, had reported Wednesday that prosecutors were examining the possible use of illegal software to manipulate emissions tests in Mercedes-Benz vehicles between 2008 and 2016. It said Daimler had sold over a million such cars in Europe and the U.S.[]
In May, Stuttgart prosecutors, who are working with authorities in the U.S,, conducted raids of 11 sites in Germany as part of a probe into Daimler and excessive diesel emissions. The searches were initiated in the course of investigations “against known and unknown employees at Daimler , who are suspected of fraud and misleading advertising connected to manipulated emissions treatment of diesel passenger cars,” the prosecutor’s office said at the time.
Did You Purchase A Mercedes Diesel (Model Years 2011-2014)?
If so, your rights under federal law may have been violated. If you would like to speak privately with an attorney to contribute to or learn more about the investigation, please complete the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
Jul 19, 2017 | Securities Class Action Archive
Kehoe Law Firm’s securities attorneys are investigating potential claims on behalf of investors of AngioDynamics, Inc. (NASDAQ: ANGO) regarding possible securities law violations.
AngioDynamics – News of ‘Material Weakness’ Causes Share Price to Fall 7.5%
After the close of trading on July 17, 2017, AngioDynamics, Inc. announced that its auditor found a material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting as of May 31, 2016, because it did not design and maintain effective internal controls over the accounting for the annual goodwill impairment test.
Specifically, AngioDynamics did not have effective controls to review in sufficient detail the cash flow projections and valuation model assumptions used in the goodwill impairment test as of December 31, 2015.
Following this news, on July 18, 2017 AngioDynamic’s share price fell by 7.5% in intraday trading, causing significant harm to investors.
SeekingAlpha Reports: “AngioDynamics discloses material weakness in accounting of annual goodwill impairment”
The above-titled SeekingAlpha article, published on July 18, 2017, disclosed the following:
AngioDynamics . . . reports that its auditor has determined that there was a material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting as of May 31, 2016 because it did not design and maintain effective internal controls over the accounting for the annual goodwill impairment test.
Specifically, it did not have effective controls to review in sufficient detail the cash flow projections and significant valuation model assumptions used in the goodwill impairment test as of December 31, 2015.
The material weakness did not result in a misstatement of the 2016 financial statements or any interim periods therein. The company adds that the material weakness has been addressed.
AngioDynamics Files Form 8-K Regarding The Material Weakness
According to AngioDynamics’ Form 8-K, dated July 17, 2017:
AngioDynamics, Inc.’s (the “Company”) management has been informed by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”), its former independent registered public accounting firm, following an inspection by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board of PwC’s audit of the May 31, 2016 financial statements and internal controls over financial reporting, that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of May 31, 2016 was not effective because the material weakness described below existed as of that date.
A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. PwC has now determined that there was a material weakness in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of May 31, 2016 because the Company did not design and maintain effective internal controls over the accounting for the annual goodwill impairment test. Specifically, the Company did not design and maintain effective controls to review in sufficient detail the cash flow projections and significant valuation model assumptions used in the goodwill impairment test as of December 31, 2015.
Management of the Company, after discussions with PwC and the Audit Committee, determined that Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2016 should no longer be relied upon due to the material weakness specifically related to the goodwill impairment test noted above.
Have You Purchased or Acquired Shares of AngioDynamics?
If you purchased or acquired shares of AngioDynamics and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn more about the investigation and your potential legal rights, please fill out the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Jul 19, 2017 | Overtime & Wages
Class & Collective Action Lawsuit Filed
Allegheny Technologies, Inc., & Strom Engineering Corporation
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. and co-counsel have filed a class and collective action lawsuit against Allegheny Technologies, Inc. (“ATI”) and Strom Engineering Corporation (“STROM”) on behalf of replacement workers who worked for these companies between August 2015 and March 2016.
The complaint claims that Strom and ATI violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) by not paying its employees for their time spent being transported to and across picket lines in front of ATI facilities.
To review a copy of the ATI and Strom Complaint, filed on July 10, 2017, please click here: Filed Complaint ATI and Strom 7.10.17
Lockout Of Approximately 2,200 Employees
ATI, a publicly-traded corporation, manufactures and supplies specialty metals-including steel and other types of materials-for its customers worldwide. On August 15, 2015, ATI instituted a lockout of approximately 2,200 employees, all of whom are covered by various collective bargaining agreements (“CBAs”) with the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC (“USW”).
ATI & USW Contract Dispute & Strom’s Temporary Workforce
The lockout occurred due to a contract dispute between ATI and USW. In response to the lockout, the USW mobilized its members to protest ATI’s decision. These protests included picket lines and rallying at plant gates.
Regarding the lockout, ATI contracted with Strom, a privately-held corporation that provides strike and replacement labor for unionized employers throughout the United States, to provide a non-unionized temporary workforce to work at the ATI plants.
ATI and Strom scheduled these replacement workers to work 84 hour workweeks, 12 hours per day, 7 days per week. The replacement workers were required to travel to ATI facilities in vans that were owned, leased, or rented by Strom and driven by the replacement workers. The time spent driving or traveling to and across picket lines to enter the ATI facilities was unpaid.
Plaintiffs allege that the required travel is compensable work time, because it was an integral and indispensable part of their principal work activities.
Replacement Workers
Replacement workers are individuals hired to fill the roles of company employees who are unable to work due to a strike or lockout. They are sent from workplace to workplace by strike replacement companies such as Strom.
Replacement workers are often limited in their ability to organize and advocate for their rights because of the temporary and transient nature of replacement work.
Instead, without job security, the ability to organize, or access to labor protections that are traditionally associated with permanent positions, replacement workers are placed at the mercy of strike staffing agencies and companies whose priorities center on ensuring continuity of their own operations, frequently at the expense of the work conditions and basic rights of the replacement workers.
In addition, replacement workers, who are typically hired from outside the community where a lockout or strike occurs and who need hourly work to support themselves and their families, are often pitted against the union employees they are replacing.
If you are a replacement worker who was employed by Strom and ATI between August 2015 and March 2016 and did not receive payment for your travel time in Strom-operated vans, please contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], or send an e-mail to [email protected], to discuss your circumstances, including whether you are eligible to join the lawsuit.
Replacement Worker Lawsuit News
Two news stories regarding the lawsuit can be accessed at:
https://www.bna.com/pay-crossing-picket-n73014461561/
http://triblive.com/local/valleynewsdispatch/12494796-74/ati-replacement-workers-sue-steel-maker-over-commuting-time-during-lockout
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
Jul 17, 2017 | Securities Class Action Archive
Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against DryShips
A class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, on behalf of a class of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired DryShips’ securities, seeking to recover damages caused by DryShips’ (NASDAQ:DRYS) violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The lawsuit alleges that between June 8, 2016 and July 12, 2017 (the “Class Period”), DryShips made materially false and misleading statements regarding DryShips’ business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, DryShips made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) DryShips engaged in a systemic stock-manipulation scheme to artificially inflate DryShips’ share price; (ii) DryShips’ transactions with British Virgin Islands firm Kalani Investments Ltd. (“Kalani”) were an illegal capital-raising scheme, due, in part, to Kalani’s failure to register as an underwriter with the SEC; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, DryShips’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
The Wall Street Journal Reports About DryShips’ “Bizarre Stock Maneuvers”
On July 13, 2017, The Wall Street Journal published an article, “A Shipping Company’s Bizarre Stock Maneuvers Create High Seas Intrigue,” which, among other things, reported:
When a company’s stock drops 99.9% in six months, there’s probably a story there. When, despite that carnage, the company’s assets double during the same period, even more so.
And when 1.68 million of the company’s shares held early last year equal exactly one share today, well, what is going on?
The locus of these bizarre doings is DryShips Inc . . . a Greek carrier that has been tracing one of the wildest rides in recent stock-market history, causing half a billion dollars of traders’ money to vanish and, it appears, making two wealthy men wealthier.
DryShips’ shares occupy a murky world of tiny stocks where information is limited and investors often bet on short-term moves. Worth barely $5 million on the stock market in early November, the company became a hot topic on stock discussion boards when its shares suddenly leapt 1,500% in four trading days.
That the company had just disclosed a huge loss and suspended debt payments “to preserve cash liquidity” evidently didn’t matter to buyers who wanted in while the stock was on fire.
But even as they were buying, the company was creating vast numbers of new shares. These it was selling at a discount to an obscure British Virgin Islands firm, which was quickly unloading many or all of the new shares.
. . .
Since then, DryShips has repeatedly printed huge numbers of new shares and sold them to the British Virgin Islands firm, on such a scale that virtually every share in existence today has been created since November.
In an apparent effort to counter the downward pressure that this new supply of shares put on the price, DryShips used another technique: reverse stock splits.
. . .
On June 8, 2016, DryShips sold Kalani securities convertible into $5 million worth of new DryShips common shares, which was equivalent to a little under 10% of the shipping company’s market value then. It was a small foretaste of what was to come.
Kalani didn’t report a 5% or more stock ownership, as U.S. regulations require, indicating it rapidly sold many of these new DryShips shares. And in succeeding weeks, DryShips’ stock tumbled.
By September, DryShips was preparing paperwork to do two things: execute a reverse stock split and issue a far larger batch of securities to Kalani.
Issuing so many new shares would normally be unrealistic for a company with a tumbling stock, but on Nov. 9 DryShips’ stock suddenly tripled, ending the day up 133%. Nasdaq temporarily halted trading four sessions later with the stock up 1,500%.
. . .
When trading resumed two days later, DryShips announced it was selling a second batch of securities to Kalani—securities the offshore firm could convert into $100 million of new DryShips common stock.
That was nearly 20 times what the entire company was worth before its stock’s mysterious rally.
DryShips gave no information about Kalani in securities filings or public statements when it sold the firm shares, except to say that Mr. Economou wasn’t affiliated with the firm. Details of Kalani’s ownership are protected by secrecy laws in the British Virgin Islands.
. . .
Even so, investor chat rooms lit up with speculation that another epic rally could be in store, given the sudden inflow of cash to the company’s coffers. Mentions of DryShips on an investing site called StockTwits, which had totaled only about 77 a week before the November rally, soared to an average of about 18,000 a week over the following four months.
The enthusiasm allowed DryShips to create and sell still more shares. In three additional deals with Kalani, the shipper agreed to sell it securities convertible into $626.4 million of new DryShips common shares.
That was equal to about 100 times DryShips’ stock-market value in early November.
To keep its stock price from falling below $1, necessary to avoid delisting, DryShips kept doing reverse stock splits—not only one on Nov. 1 but also one on Jan. 23, one on April 11, one on May 11 and one last month, on June 22. All had the approval of Nasdaq, where the stock trades.
The Wall Street Journal also reported that
[l]egal experts said the quick sales raise questions for regulators. “If [Kalani is] buying it with the intent to resell, then they’re acting as an underwriter and this is a public offering,” said Jill Fisch, a University of Pennsylvania law professor who specializes in securities regulation. In an underwriting, a licensed entity, normally a bank, sells shares to the public and gives the proceeds to the company.
James Angel, a financial-markets expert at Georgetown University, said the deal sounds like a “pseudo-underwriting.”
Kalani isn’t registered the . . . Securities and Exchange Commission as an underwriter. That means it is possible “both the company and the intermediary are on the hook for violating securities laws,” Ms. Fisch said.
. . .
The tens of millions of new DryShips shares created have hammered long-term investors through stock dilution on a grand scale, since far more shares now have a claim on the company.
Investors who bought DryShips[‘] shares last fall and held on have lost almost all of their money. A $10,000 investment in DryShips stock at the beginning of November was worth $167,000 two weeks later, during the brief price spike, but only about $2 today.
Splash24/7 Reports DryShips Named Defendants in High Court Action
On July 5, 2017, splash247.com reported that “DryShips and its chairman and chief executive officer George Economou have been named as defendants in a lawsuit filed in the High Court of the Marshall Islands which alleges breaches of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and conflict of interest.”
Further, splash247.com reported that “[i]n May, DryShips was deemed the worst listed company for corporate governance in a regularly updated poll carried by investment bank Wells Fargo and its equity analyst Michael Webber.”
Do You Own DryShips’ Securities?
If you purchased or otherwise acquired shares in DryShips and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn more about the investigation, fill out the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.
The Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of the Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
