Sitting en banc, the Delaware Supreme Court this month delivered an important message on two of the most hotly debated issues in corporate litigation: how courts should handle dueling shareholder lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions, and whether fast-filing class action and derivative plaintiffs should be accorded an advantage over late filers who prepare a more complete complaint. Pyott v. Louisiana Municipal Police Employees Retirement System, No. 380, 2012 (Del. April 4, 2013).
The case concerns Allergan Inc., the Delaware-incorporated, California-headquartered company that makes Botox. In September 2010, Allergan entered into a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in which it pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of marketing Botox for "off-label uses" that is, uses other than the specific uses approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Under the terms of the settlement, Allergan agreed to pay a total of $600 million in fines.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
