Class Action Lawsuit Sample Clauses

Class Action Lawsuit. On March 22, 1999, a class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Civil Action No. 99-176) against Little Switzerland, Inc. ("Little Switzerland") certain of its former officers and directors, DRHC and Xxxxxxx X.X.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Class Action Lawsuit. In January 2014, Xxxxxxxx LLP, a Canadian law firm, filed a class action (the “Class Action”) against the Company, certain of its former senior officers and directors, and its former auditors (the “Former Auditors”), in the Ontario Court in relation to the Company’s restatement of certain financial statements previously disclosed in the Company’s public fillings (the “Restatement”). To commence and proceed with the Class Action, the plaintiff was required to seek leave of the Court under the Ontario Securities Act (“Leave Motion”) and certify the action as a class proceeding under the Ontario Class Proceedings Act. The Ontario Court rendered its decision on the Leave Motion on November 5, 2015, dismissing the action against the former senior officers and directors and allowing the action to proceed against the Company in respect of alleged misrepresentation affecting trades in the secondary market for the Company’s securities arising from the Restatement. The action against the Former Auditors was settled by the plaintiff on the eve of the Leave Motion. Both the plaintiff and the Company appealed the Leave Motion decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal. On September 18, 2017, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the Company’s appeal of the Leave Motion to permit the plaintiff to commence and proceed with the Class Action. Concurrently, the Ontario Court of Appeal granted leave for the plaintiff to proceed with their action against the former senior officers and directors in relation to the Restatement. The Company filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada in November 2017, but the leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was dismissed in June 2018. In December 2018, the parties agreed to a consent Certification Order, whereby the action against the former senior officers and directors was withdrawn and the Class Action would only proceed against the Company. Counsel for the plaintiff and defendants have agreed on and the case management judge has ordered a trial to commence in December 2022 (subject to court availability). To accomplish all steps necessary for trial preparation, counsels have agreed to the following proposed schedule under the case management of the judge: (i) document production and pleading amendments by October 31, 2021; (ii) oral examinations for discovery ending by December 31, 2022; (iii) expert reports of plaintiff complete by April 25, 2022 and expert reports of defendants complete by August 22,...
Sample 1See All (6)
Class Action Lawsuit. Scope Of The Privacy Policy
Sample 1Sample 2
Class Action Lawsuit. In the first quarter of 2012, a purported shareholder class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against the Borrower, its President and Chief Executive Officer and its Chief Financial Officer. The complaint, Xxxxx X. Xxxxx v. Powerwave Technologies. Inc. et. al. asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. On July 23, 2011, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. The amended complaint purports to state claims on behalf of all persons who purchased our Common Stock between October 28, 2010 and October 18, 2011 and seeks compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial. The complaint alleges that the defendants made misleading statements or omissions concerning the Borrower’s operations and projected sales revenues and also engaged in improper revenue recognition accounting practices.
Sample 1Sample 2
Class Action Lawsuit. In the event of any dispute, claim, or controversy arising out of, related to, or in connection with the Websites, this Privacy Policy, or the Daily Journal User Agreement (a “Claim”), including the determination of the scope or applicability of this agreement to arbitrate, shall be determined in Los Angeles, California, before one arbitrator. The arbitration shall be administered by JAMS pursuant to JAMS’ Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures. Judgment on the Award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. This clause shall not preclude parties from seeking provisional remedies in aid of arbitration from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. The parties shall maintain the confidential nature of the arbitration proceeding and the Award, including the Hearing, except as may be necessary to prepare for or conduct the arbitration hearing on the merits, or except as may be necessary in connection with a court application for a preliminary remedy, a judicial challenge to an Award or its enforcement, or unless otherwise required by law or judicial decision.
Sample 1
Class Action Lawsuit. On May 24, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the “Ontario Court”) granted the Company leave to appeal the decision made on November 5, 2015 (the “Corporation Appeal”), which granted the plaintiff permission to commence an action claiming damages under the Ontario Securities Act with respect to the Company’s restatement of consolidated financial statements as previously disclosed in the Company’s public filings. The plaintiff is also appealing the portion of the November 5, 2015 Ontario Court decision that dismissed the action against former officers and directors of the Company (the “Individual’s Appeal”). The Individuals’ Appeal and the Corporation Appeal will now be verbally argued together. The appeals are scheduled to be heard by the Ontario Court of Appeal in June 2017. The Company disputes and is vigorously defending itself against the plaintiff’s claims through independent Canadian litigation counsel retained by the Company and the other defendants for this purpose. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, it is not possible to predict the final outcome of the appeals or determine the amount of potential losses, if any. However, the Company has judged a provision for this matter at December 31, 2016 is not required.
Sample 1
Class Action Lawsuit. In addition to the indemnification by ATP and Seller of Buyer set forth in Section 12.2 hereof relating to the Class Action Lawsuit, each of ATP and Seller shall assign all insurance proceeds to Buyer to the extent of Buyer’s damages and costs of defense including the reasonable attorney fees of counsel selected by Buyer. ATP and Seller further agree to pay Buyer’s reasonable attorney fees and costs as incurred in any such matter involving the Class Action Lawsuit.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Class Action Lawsuit. Warrants may only be transferred in compliance with the conditions of the Warrant Agreement on the register to be kept by the Warrant Agent in Vancouver, British Columbia, or such other registrar as the Company, with the approval of the Warrant Agent, may appoint at such other place or places, if any, as may be designated, upon surrender of this Warrant Certificate to the Warrant Agent or other registrar accompanied by a written instrument of transfer in form and execution satisfactory to the Warrant Agent or other registrar and upon compliance with the conditions prescribed in the Warrant Agreement and with such reasonable requirements as the Warrant Agent or other registrar may prescribe and upon the transfer being duly noted thereon by the Warrant Agent or other registrar. Time is of the essence hereof.
Sample 1
Class Action Lawsuit. In 2012, a class action lawsuit was commenced in Ontario by Class Counsel (the “Baja Mining Class Action Lawsuit”) on behalf of all persons and entities, wherever they may reside or be domiciled, who acquired securities in Baja Mining Corp. (“Baja”) between November 1, 2010 and April 23, 2012 (“the Class Period”) and who held some or all of those securities as of April 23, 2012 (“Class Members”). The lawsuit alleged that the defendants breached the Ontario Securities Act by making misrepresentations and/or failing to make timely disclosure of significant cost overruns and project delays related to Baja’s Boleo Project located in Baja California Sur, Mexico. It was alleged that the misrepresentations and failure to disclose important information affected the value of the securities to the detriment of Class Members.
Sample 1

Related to Class Action Lawsuit

  • CLASS ACTIONS The Custodian shall use its best efforts to identify and file claims for the Fund(s) involving any class action litigation that impacts any security the Fund(s) may have held during the class period. The Trust agrees that the Custodian may file such claims on its behalf and understands that it may be waiving and/or releasing certain rights to make claims or otherwise pursue class action defendants who settle their claims. Further, the Trust acknowledges that there is no guarantee these claims will result in any payment or partial payment of potential class action proceeds and that the timing of such payment, if any, is uncertain. However, the Trust may instruct the Custodian to distribute class action notices and other relevant documentation to the Fund(s) or its designee and, if it so elects, will relieve the Custodian from any and all liability and responsibility for filing class action claims on behalf of the Fund(s). In the event the Fund(s) are closed, the Custodian shall only file the class action claims upon written instructions by an authorized representative of the closed Fund(s). Any expenses associated with such filing will be assessed against the proceeds received of any class action settlement.

  • Class Action Filings The Sub-Adviser is not responsible for making any class action filings on behalf of the Trust.

  • Class Action Waiver THE PARTIES AGREE THAT ANY CLAIMS WILL BE ADJUDICATED ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, AND EACH WAIVES THE RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN A CLASS, COLLECTIVE, PAGA, OR OTHER JOINT ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THE CLAIMS.

  • Other Legal Actions The actions stipulated in this Integrity Pact are without prejudice to any other legal action that may follow in accordance with the provisions of the extant law in force relating to any civil or criminal proceedings.

  • Suits, Actions, Proceedings If an Event of Default shall occur and be continuing, and whether or not the Agent shall have accelerated the maturity of Loans pursuant to any of the foregoing provisions of this Section 9.2, the Agent or any Bank, if owed any amount with respect to the Loans, may proceed to protect and enforce its rights by suit in equity, action at law and/or other appropriate proceeding, whether for the specific performance of any covenant or agreement contained in this Agreement or the other Loan Documents, including as permitted by applicable Law the obtaining of the ex parte appointment of a receiver, and, if such amount shall have become due, by declaration or otherwise, proceed to enforce the payment thereof or any other legal or equitable right of the Agent or such Bank; and

  • Litigation; Claims Any rights (including indemnification) and claims and recoveries under litigation of Seller against third parties arising out of or relating to events prior to the Closing Date;

  • Legal Action There shall not have been instituted or threatened any legal proceeding relating to, or seeking to prohibit or otherwise challenge the consummation of, the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, or to obtain substantial damages with respect thereto.

  • Settlement of Actions Neither the Manager nor any other Underwriter party to this Master AAU may settle or agree to settle any Action related to or arising out of the Offering, nor may any other Underwriter settle or agree to settle any such Action without the consent of the Manager, nor may any other Underwriter seek the Manager’s consent to any such settlement agreement, nor may the Manager consent to any such settlement agreement, unless: (A) the Manager, together with such other Underwriters as constitute a majority in aggregate interest based on the Underwriting Percentage of the Underwriters as a whole (including the Manager’s interest), approve the settlement of such Action, in which case the Manager is authorized to settle for all Underwriters, provided, however, that the settlement agreement results in the settlement of the Action against all Underwriters raised by the plaintiffs party thereto; or (B) (i) such settlement agreement expressly provides that the non-settling Underwriters will be given a judgment credit (or credit in settlement) with respect to all such Actions for which the non-settling Underwriters may be found liable (or will pay in subsequent settlement), in an amount that is the greatest of: (x) the dollar amount paid in such initial settlement to settle such Actions, (y) the proportionate share of the settling Underwriter’s fault in respect of common damages arising in connection with such Actions as proven at trial, if applicable, or (z) the amount by which the settling Underwriter would have been required to make contribution had it not settled, under Sections 9.5 and 11.2 hereof in respect of the final non-appealable judgment (or settlement) subsequently entered into by the non-settling Underwriters (such greatest amount of either (x), (y), or (z), the “Judgment Credit”);3 (ii) such settlement agreement expressly provides that in the event that the applicable court does not approve the Judgment Credit as part of the settlement, the settlement agreement will automatically terminate; and (iii) the final judgment entered with respect to the settlement agreement contains the Judgment Credit.

  • Proxies; Class Actions (a) The Manager has provided the Subadvisor a copy of the Manager’s Proxy Voting Policy, setting forth the policy that proxies be voted for the exclusive benefit and in the best interests of the Trust. Absent contrary instructions received in writing from the Trust, the Subadvisor will vote all proxies solicited by or with respect to the issuers of securities held by the Series in accordance with applicable fiduciary obligations. The Subadvisor shall maintain records concerning how it has voted proxies on behalf of the Trust, and these records shall be available to the Trust upon request. (b) Manager acknowledges and agrees that the Subadvisor shall not be responsible for taking any action or rendering advice with respect to any class action claim relating to any assets held in the Allocated Assets or Series. Manager will instruct the applicable service providers not to forward to the Subadvisor any information concerning such actions. The Subadvisor will, however, forward to Manager any information it receives regarding any legal matters involving any asset held in the Allocated Assets or Series.

  • Stockholder Litigation The Company shall give Parent the opportunity to participate in the defense or settlement of any stockholder litigation against the Company and/or its directors relating to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, and no such settlement shall be agreed to without Parent’s prior written consent.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!