Securities Fraud + Corporate Governance
Scott+Scott represents individuals and institutional investors that have suffered from stock fraud
and corporate malfeasance. Scott+Scott’s philosophy is simple – directors and officers should be
truthful in their dealings with the public markets and honor their duties to their shareholders.
Since its inception, Scott+Scott’s securities and corporate governance litigation department has
developed and maintained a reputation of excellence and integrity recognized by state and
federal and state courts across the country. “It is this Court’s position that Scott+Scott did a
superlative job in its representation, which substantially benefited Ariel . . . . For the record, it
should be noted that Scott+Scott has demonstrated a remarkable grasp and handling of the
extraordinarily complex matters in this case . . . . They have possessed a knowledge of the issues
presented and this knowledge has always been used to the benefit of all investors.” N.Y. Univ. v.
Ariel Fund Ltd., No. 603803/08, slip. op. at 9-10 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Feb. 22, 2010). “The quality of
representation here is demonstrated, in part, by the result achieved for the class. Further, it has
been this court’s experience, throughout the ongoing litigation of this matter, that counsel have
conducted themselves with the utmost professionalism and respect for the court and the judicial
process.” In re Priceline.com, Inc. Sec. Litig., No. 00-cv-01884, 2007 WL 2115592, at *5 (D.
Conn. July 20, 2007).
Scott+Scott has successfully prosecuted numerous class actions under the federal securities laws,
resulting in the recovery of hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders. Representative
cases prosecuted by Scott+Scott under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 include: In re
Priceline.com, Inc. Sec. Litig., No. 00-cv-01884 (D. Conn. July 19, 2007) ($80 million
settlement); Cornwell v. Credit Suisse Group, No. 08-cv-03758 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2011) ($70
million settlement); and Schnall v. Annuity and Life Re (Holdings) Ltd., No. 02-cv-2133 (D.
Conn. June 13, 2008) ($26.5 million settlement). Representative cases prosecuted by
Scott+Scott under the Securities Act of 1933 include: Parker v. National City Corp., No. CV-08-
657360 (Ohio Ct. Com. Pl., Cuyahoga County, June 23, 2010) ($5.25 million settlement); and
Hamel v. GT Solar International, Inc., No. 217-2010-CV-05004 (N.H. Super. Ct., Merrimack
County, May 10, 2011) ($10.25 million settlement).
Scott+Scott currently serves as court-appointed lead counsel in various federal securities class
actions, including St. Lucie County Fire District Firefighter’s Pension Trust Fund v. Oilsands
Quest Inc., No. 11-cv-1288-JSR (S.D.N.Y. May 23, 2011); In re Washington Mutual Mortgage
Backed Securities Litigation, No. 09-cv-0037 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 23, 2009); and West Palm Beach
Police Pension Fund v. CardioNet, Inc., No. 37-2010-00086836-CU-SL-CTL (Cal. Super. Ct.,
San Diego County, 2010) ($7.25 million settlement pending).
In addition to prosecuting federal securities class actions, Scott+Scott has a proven track record
of handling corporate governance matters through its extensive experience litigating shareholder
derivative actions. Representative actions include: In re Marvell Tech. Group Ltd. Derivative
Litigation, No. C-06-03894-RMW (RS) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2009) ($54.9 million and corporate
governance reforms); In re Qwest Communications International, Inc., No. Civ. 01-RB-1451 (D.
Colo. June 15, 2004) ($25 million and corporate governance reform); Carfagno v. Schnitzer, No.
08-cv-912-SAS (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 2009) (modification of terms of preferred securities issued to
insiders valued at $8 million); and Garcia v. Carrion, No. 3:09-cv-01507 (D.P.R. Sept. 12, 2011)
(settlement of derivative claims against the company and its officers and directors providing for
corporate governance reforms valued between $10.05 million and $15.49 million).
Currently, Scott+Scott is actively prosecuting shareholder derivative actions, including Plymouth
County Contributory Retirement Fund v. Hassan, No. 08-cv-1022 (D.N.J.); Louisiana Municipal
Police Employees Retirement System v. Ritter, 20-CV-01588 (Ala. Cir. Ct., Jefferson County);
Estate of Jacquelin K. Stevenson v. Kavanaugh, No. 08-CP-10-1735 (S.C. Ct. Com. Pl.,
Charleston County); Currie v. Begley, No. 2011 MR 000608 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Kane County); and
North Miami Beach General Employees Retirement Fund v. Parkinson, No. 10C6514 (N.D. Ill.).
Click to view Securities Cases
Click to view Securities Cases
Scott+Scott is actively involved in litigating complex antitrust cases throughout the United
States. Scott+Scott represents consumers and businesses in price-fixing, bid-rigging,
monopolization, and other restraints of trade cases. In such actions, Scott+Scott works to ensure
that the markets remain free, open, and competitive to the benefit of both consumers and
business. Scott+Scott’s class action antitrust experience includes serving as co-trial counsel in In
re Scrap Metal Antitrust Litigation, 02-cv-0844-KMO (N.D. Ohio), where it helped obtain a
$34.5 million jury verdict, which was subsequently affirmed by the United States Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. See In re Scrap Metal Antitrust Litigation, 527 F.3d 517, 524 (6th
Scott+Scott currently serves as lead counsel in a number of class action antitrust cases, including
Dahl v. Bain Capital Partners, LLC, No. 1:07-cv-12388 (D. Mass.) (challenging bid rigging and
market allocation in the private equity/leveraged-buyout industry), and In re WellPoint, Inc. Out-
Of-Network “UCR” Rates Litigation, No. 2:09-ml-02074 (C.D. Cal.) (challenging price-fixing in
the health insurance industry), and In re Korean Air Lines Co., LTD. Antitrust Litigation, MDL
No. 1891, No. CV 07-06542 (C.D. Cal.) (challenging price fixing/illegal surcharge).
Additionally, Scott+Scott serves on leadership executive committees in various class action cases
including In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation, No.
1:05-md-1720 (E.D.N.Y.) (one of the largest class actions ever brought), and In re Aetna UCR
Litigation, MDL No. 2020 (D.N.J.) (price-fixing in the health insurance industry).
In addition to antitrust class actions, Scott+Scott represents clients in opt-out antitrust litigation.
Past clients include publicly traded corporations, such as Parker Hannifin Corporation and
PolyOne Corporation. Representative opt-out litigation prosecuted by Scott+Scott includes In re
Rubber Chemicals Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1648 (N.D. Cal.); In re Polychloroprene
Rubber (CR) Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1642 (D. Conn.); and In re Plastic Additives
Antitrust Litigation (No. II), MDL No. 1684 (E.D, Pa.).
Click to view Antitrust Cases.
Scott+Scott regularly represents the rights of consumers throughout the United States by
prosecuting class actions under federal and state laws. In Gunther v. Capital One, N.A., No. 09-
2966-ADS-AKT (E.D.N.Y.), Scott+Scott obtained a net settlement resulting in class members
receiving 100% of their damages. Other settlements obtained by Scott+Scott include In re Kava
Kava Litigation, Lead Case No. BC 269717 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles County); Fischer v.
MasterCard International, Inc., No. 600572/2003 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. and New York County); Salkin
v. MasterCard International Incorporated, No. 002648 (Penn. Ct. Com. Pl., Philadelphia
Scott+Scott currently serves as lead counsel in In re Prudential Insurance Company of America
SGLI/VGLI Contract Litigation, No. 3:11-md-02208-MAP (D. Mass.) (challenging Prudential’s
actions relating to the issuance of life insurance contracts to the nation’s military personnel and
dependents); In re Nutella Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, No. 3:11-cv-01086-FLWDEA
(D.N.J.); and Franco v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Co., No. 07-cv-6039-SRC-PS
(D.N.J.) (challenging the reimbursement of out-of-network healthcare charges).
Click to view Consumer Cases
Employee Benefits (ERISA)
Scott+Scott litigates complex class actions across the United States on behalf of corporate
employees alleging violations of the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act. ERISA
was enacted by Congress to prevent employers from exercising improper control over retirement
plan assets and requires that pension and 401(k) plan trustees, including employer corporations,
owe the highest fiduciary duties to retirement plans and their participants as to their retirement
funds. Scott+Scott is committed to continuing its leadership in ERISA and related employee retirement
litigation, as well as to those employees who entrust their employers with hard-earned
retirement savings. Representative recoveries by Scott+Scott include: In re Royal Dutch/Shell
Transport ERISA Litigation, No. 2:04-cv-01398-JWB-SDW (D.N.J. Aug. 30, 2005) ($90 million
settlement); In re General Motors ERISA Litigation, No. 2:05-cv-71085-NGE-RSW (E.D. Mich.
June 5, 2008) ($37.5 million settlement); and Rantala v. ConAgra Foods, No. 8:05-cv-00349-
LES-TDT (D. Neb.) ($4 million settlement).
Civil Rights Litigation
Scott+Scott has also successfully litigated cases to enforce its clients’ civil rights. In The Vulcan
Society, Inc. v. The City of New York, No. 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM (E.D.N.Y.), Scott+Scott
was part of a team of lawyers representing a class of black applicants who were denied or
delayed employment as New York City firefighters due to decades of racial discriminatory
conduct. The district court certified the class in a post-Walmart v. Dukes decision, granted
summary judgment against the City on both intentional discrimination and disparate impact
claims, and after trial ordered broad injunctive relief, including a new examination, revision of
the application procedure, and continued monitoring by a court-appointed monitor for at least 10
years. The back pay and compensatory damage award will be determined in a subsequent ruling.
In Hohider v. United Parcel Services, Inc., No. 2:04-cv-00363-JFC (W.D. Penn.), Scott+Scott
obtained significant structural changes to UPS’s Americans with Disabilities Act compliance
policies and monetary awards for some individual employees in settlement of a ground-breaking
case seeking nationwide class certification of UPS employees who were barred from
reemployment after suffering injuries on the job.