Burford Slapped With Class Action Securities Suit After Muddy Waters Dustup
The Rosen Law Firm in New York seeks to represent investors who claim they were damaged by Burford Capital's allegedly false and misleading statements that artificially inflated securities.
August 22, 2019 at 03:02 PM
3 minute read
Litigation funder Burford Capital is facing a shareholder class action lawsuit after it was accused of being insolvent and of doctoring its returns earlier this month.
The Rosen Law Firm is representing Burford securities investor Stephen Merz in the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Merz accuses the funder of misrepresenting or failing to disclose signs of adverse business conditions, citing Burford's annual reports going back to 2014 and a report released by Muddy Waters on Aug. 7.
The lawsuit regurgitates key charges levied in the Muddy Waters report, including that Burford has manipulated its metrics to conceal that the company is "arguably insolvent."
"Had plaintiff and the other members of the class been aware that the market price of Burford securities had been artificially and falsely inflated by defendants' misleading statements and by the material[ly] adverse information which defendants did not disclose, they would not have purchased Burford securities at the artificially inflated prices that they did, or at all," the Rosen Law Firm's Phillip Kim and Laurence Rosen wrote.
Burford declined to comment on the ongoing litigation. Kim and Rosen did not immediately respond to a request for comment at the time of publication.
The complaint asserts that the truth began to emerge after the Muddy Waters report was published, causing Burford's ordinary shares to dip 42% to $5.90 a share.
The following day, Burford called the the report "false and misleading," and jumped on a shareholder call to answer investors' questions about the allegations.
In addition to the company, the lawsuit names Burford chairman Peter Middleton, CEO Christopher Bogart, Chief Investment Officer Jonathan Molot and board director Charles Parkinson. Merz's lawyers allege that the individual defendants were aware or involved with the dissemination of false and misleading statements.
"The Individual defendants, who are the senior officers and/or directors of the company, had actual knowledge of the material omissions and/or the falsity of the material statements set forth above, and intended to deceive Plaintiff and the other members of the class, or, in the alternative, acted with reckless disregard for the truth when they failed to ascertain and disclose the true facts in the statements made by them or other Burford personnel to members of the investing public, including Plaintiff and the Class," the lawsuit said.
The complaint seeks damages, and counsel and expert fees.
The Rosen Law Firm has had a series of high-profile securities litigation wins and appointments. This month, the firm was tapped to investigate Uber shareholders' securities claims against the ride-hailing company and an investigation for shareholders of pharmaceutical company Novartis AG. In April, the firm secured a $250 million settlement for investors of online retailer Alibaba, as well as a $110 million settlement for Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V. Investors.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMore Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
Dog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
4 minute readIn Talc Bankruptcy, Andy Birchfield Skipped His Deposition. Could He Face Sanctions?
6 minute readGC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Litigators of the Week: A Trade Secret Win at the ITC for Viking Over Promising Potential Liver Drug
- 2Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 3'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Match Group's Katie Dugan & Herrick's Carol Goodman
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Eric Wall, Executive VP, Syllo
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250