Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC Announces Class Action
Recent Cases
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC announces that a class action has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District Court of New York on behalf of purchasers of Camelot Information Systems Inc. American Depositary Shares ("ADSs") between July 21, 2010 and August 17, 2011 (the "Class Period"), including those who acquired Camelot ADSs pursuant or traceable to the Company's false and misleading Registration Statements and Prospectuses issued in connection with its July 21, 2010 initial public offering and December 10, 2010 Secondary Offering.
No Class has yet been certified in the above action. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, to discuss this action, or have any questions, please contact either Peretz Bronstein or Eitan Kimelman of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484 or via email eitan@bgandg.com. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address and telephone number. March 5, 2012 is the deadline for investors to seek a lead plaintiff appointment.
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of both class and individual litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general corporate work, litigation and securities arbitration.
http://www.bgandg.com
Related listings
-
Court papers: NYC officer shooting suspect sorry
Recent Cases 01/05/2012The man charged with murder in the shooting death of a police officer during a botched break-in apologized and said he didn't mean to fire the gun, according to court papers released Wednesday. Lamont Pride, 27, and four others have pleaded not guilt...
-
Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Recent Cases 01/04/2012The action alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose that: (1) China Med’s acquisition of Bio-Ekon Biotechnology Co. Ltd. was from a third-party seller connected to the Company’s own chairman;...
-
Court delays border-crossing pollution rule
Recent Cases 01/03/2012A federal court Friday put on hold a controversial Obama administration regulation aimed at reducing power plant pollution in 27 states that contributes to unhealthy air downwind. More than a dozen electric power companies, municipal power plant oper...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.