SAKHRANI v. BRIGHTPOINT, INC.

Nos. IP-99-870-C H/G, IP-99-1157-C H/G, IP-99-943-C H/G and IP-99-1138-C H/G.

78 F.Supp.2d 845 (1999)

Rajesh SAKHRANI, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BRIGHTPOINT, INC., et al., Defendants. Jack Clark, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Brightpoint, Inc., et al., Defendants. Gertrude Sendermair, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Brightpoint, Inc., et al., Defendants. Lynn Desrosiers, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Brightpoint, Inc., et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division.

December 8, 1999.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kevin J. Yourman, Weiss & Yourman, Los Angeles, CA, Michael D. Braun, Stull Stull & Brody, Los Angeles, CA, James A. Knauer, Kroger Gardis & Regas, Indianapolis, IN, William C. Potter, II, Price, Potter & Mellowitz, Indianapolis, IN, for plaintiffs.

James H. Ham, III, Baker & Daniels, Indianapolis, IN, Ira A. Finkelstein, Tenzer Greenblatt LLP, New York City, for defendants.


ENTRY ON MOTIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF LEAD PLAINTIFFS AND APPOINTING COUNSEL FOR PUTATIVE CLASS

HAMILTON, District Judge.

Like many recent putative class actions alleging securities fraud, these consolidated cases illustrate the law of unintended consequences. The principal issue is the selection of a "lead plaintiff" under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3). The specific problem is whether a number of investors...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases