Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. attorneys are proven litigators who represent institutional and retail investors. The Firm’s lawyers have repeatedly and consistently obtained significant recoveries from corporate and individual defendants faced in courts and across the negotiating table, including serving as lead counsel or counsel in the following groundbreaking cases:
In Re Tyco International Ltd. Securities Litigation, MDL No. 02-1335-PB (D.N.H)
Landmark $3.2 billion settlement, including the then largest securities class-action recovery from a single corporate defendant ($2.975 billion) and the second largest auditor settlement ($225 million), involving acquisition accounting fraud and looting of the company’s assets by its former officers and directors. Dennis Kozlowski, Tyco’s former CEO, eventually went to prison for 6-1/2 years for using the company as his personal piggy bank.
In re Petrobras Securities Litigation, 1:14-cv-09662 (S.D.N.Y.)
Securities class action recovery ($3 billion settlement) involving the largest single payout by a foreign issuer in securities class action history, as well as the largest securities class action settlement involving a foreign Lead Plaintiff. Even more impressive, the class settlement, according to Petrobras charges, represented a sixty-five percent premium over settlements of various individual plaintiffs who did not participate in the class action.
In re Bank of America Corporation Securities Litigation, 09-MDL-2058 (S.D.N.Y.)
Securities class action on behalf of certain shareholders of Bank of America Corporation (“BoA”) arising from materially misleading statements and omissions regarding BoA’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. The parties reached an agreement to settle the action for a total of $2.425 billion in cash and certain corporate governance improvements to be implemented or continued by BoA, which has been approved by the Court.
In re Lehman Brothers Equity/Debt Securities Litigation, 08-cv-5523 (S.D.N.Y.)
Securities class action on behalf of certain shareholders and bondholders of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.’s (“Lehman”) in connection with Lehman’s use of undisclosed repurchase and resale transactions, failures to adhere to risk limits, and misstatements concerning Lehman’s concentration of mortgage and real estate-related assets, preventing investors from meaningfully assessing Lehman’s exposure to these risky assets. The Court subsequently approved settlements totaling $615,218,000 in connection with the litigation, to resolve claims against the individual officer and director defendants, underwriters of certain Lehman offerings, and against Ernst & Young LLP, Lehman’s former auditor.
In re Wachovia Corp. Preferred Securities and Bond/Notes Litigation, 09-cv-6351 (S.D.N.Y.)
Securities class action on behalf of Wachovia debt holders who alleged that Wachovia sold more than $35 billion of bonds to investors in a series of public offerings while misrepresenting the true nature and quality of Wachovia’s “Pick-A-Pay” Option ARM mortgage loan portfolio, and Wachovia’s exposure to billions of dollars of losses in mortgage-related assets. On March 31, 2011, the court issued an Opinion and Order substantially denying Defendants’ motions to dismiss. On August 5, 2011, Plaintiffs announced that they reached a settlement with all the defendants for a total recovery of $627 million.
In re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, 21 MC 92 (S.D.N.Y.)
Over 500 securities class actions that consolidated and alleged artificial inflation of stock prices resulting from improper laddering and the payment of excessive commissions to secure IPO stock allocations during the 1990s’ “dot-com” boom. The consolidated actions settled for $586 million.
In Re Delphi Corporation Securities, Derivative & “ERISA” Litigation, MDL No. 1725 (E.D. Mich.)
$300 million class-action settlement against auto-parts manufacturer Delphi Corporation (reduced because of bankruptcy), including an additional $38 million recovery against Delphi’s outside auditor. The consolidated complaint contained 16 separate counts based on allegations of fraud stemming from the misrepresentations in Delphi’s SEC filings and in various stock and bond offering materials.
In re Brocade Securities Litigation, 05-cv-02042 (N.D. Cal.)
Securities class action alleging that Defendants violated federal securities laws by backdating options grants to top executives and falsifying the date of stock option grants to numerous employees from 2000 through 2004, ultimately causing Brocade to restate its financial statements from 2000 through 2005. In addition, concurrent SEC civil and DOJ criminal actions against certain individual defendants were commenced. After denying defendants’ motions to dismiss and certifying a class of Brocade investors who were damaged by the alleged fraud, the case settled for $160 million.
CVS Corporation Securities Litigation, 01-11464-JLT (D. Mass.)
$110 million recovery on behalf of a group of injured shareholders, then representing one of the largest settlements in a securities class-action in First Circuit history. Beginning on August 22, 2001, nine putative class action complaints were filed and eventually consolidated, asserting that CVS engaged in a scheme to artificially inflate its stock price by making various false and misleading statements regarding gits financial condition and business prospects.
In Re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation, MDL 1586 (D. Md.)
After over six and one-half years of litigation, settlements totaling more than $80 million were reached in over sixteen subtracts of mutual funds, including Alliance, Alger, and Excelsior. The action arose from alleged market-timing and late-trading practices within certain families of mutual funds, and through these practices, certain traders were given preferential treatment to the disadvantage of other investors, while the mutual funds willfully or recklessly turned a blind eye to the market timing trades.
In re Safeway Inc. Stockholders Litigation, 9445-VCL (Delaware Court of Chancery)
Representing the Louisiana Municipal Police Employees’ Retirement System, the verified class action complaint alleged that Safeway’s Board breached its fiduciary duties to shareholders, relating to the private equity sale of Safeway to Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. Pursuant to the settlement, Defendants agreed to withdraw a poison pill and to pay fair value for certain contingent value rights, increasing the value to Safeway shareholders by at least $80 million.
In re Marvell Technology Group, Ltd. Securities Litigation, 06-06286 (N.D. Cal.)
Securities class action filed against Marvell Technology Group Ltd. (“Marvell”) and three executive officers, involving an alleged options backdating scheme from June 2000 through June 2006, which enabled Marvell executives and employees to receive options with favorable option exercise prices selected with the benefit of hindsight, violating Marvell’s stock option plan while avoiding hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation expenses on Marvell’s books. Marvell eventually conceded that it understated the effect of its compensation expense and overstated net income. Marvel settled the litigation for $72 million, a settlement among the largest reached in an options backdating securities class action.
Deora v. Nanthealth Inc., et al., 2:17-cv-01825 (C.D. Cal)
Lawyers from Kehoe Law Firm, along with co-counsel, served as Lead Counsel in this securities class action alleging that NantHealth’s founder, Patrick Soon-Shiong, violated federal securities law and artificially inflated stock prices by structuring a purportedly philanthropic donation to the University of Utah such that the University was obligated to pay NantHealth $10 million for research services. Additionally, plaintiffs alleged that NantHealth exaggerated the success of one of its key products, called GPS Cancer. On September 10, 2020, the Court granted final approval to a $16.5 million class action settlement for NantHealth investors.
In re United Development Funding IV Securities Litigation, 3:15-cv-4030-M (N.D. Texas)
Kehoe Law Firm served as Lead Counsel in litigation stemming from allegations that UDF IV and UDF V were operating Ponzi-like schemes in violation of federal and Texas state law, using money raised in new offerings to pay investors in earlier offerings through opaque lending practices and misleading disclosures. On February 15, 2019, the Court granted final approval to a $13.5 million settlement on behalf of investors.
Buffalo Grove Police Pension Fund (derivatively) v. William M. Deifenderfer et al., 19-0062 (E.D. Pa)
Representing the Buffalo Grove Police Pension Fund, attorneys with Kehoe Law Firm alleged that Navient Corporation, which services and makes collections of certain private and federal student loans, committed payment processing errors, and failed to implement the internal controls necessary to appropriately service student loans, leading to misapplied payments, misinformation being sent to borrowers, and false reporting to credit agencies of certain loans. As a result of the litigation, Navient agreed to implement numerous corporate governance reforms, including, inter alia, adding two new independent directors to the board; hiring a Senior VP responsible for loan servicing and collections compliance; forming a new executive-level committee to perform audits on loan servicing and collections and oversee the company’s loan servicing controls; and adopting additional risk oversight disclosures.
Al’s Discount Plumbing et al., v Viega LLC, 1:19-cv-00159 (M.D. Pa)
Representing heating and plumbing companies that were indirect purchasers of Viega ProPress® copper press fittings, attorneys with Kehoe Law Firm helped prosecute various related cases pending before Chief Judge Christopher Conner in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The lawsuits alleged that Viega LLC, a plumbing and HVAC equipment manufacturer, used its monopoly power to undermine competitors in the market for copper press fittings. On December 18, 2020, Judge Conner granted final approval to a $15 million antitrust settlement on behalf of damaged purchasers.
In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation, 99-197 (D.D.C.)
Class action and numerous individual actions involving companies that purchased bulk vitamin products seeking to recover overcharges from an alleged international price fixing cartel. The case settlements were among the largest recoveries in antitrust history.