Shareholder and Securities Disputes Shareholder and Securities Disputes The firm defends companies, officers, directors, and other professionals
in complex securities fraud and shareholder claims in both state and federal courts.

Shareholder and Securities Disputes

At AM&R, we have extensive experience representing individual and corporate clients in a wide range of shareholder and securities-related claims in federal and state courts throughout the United States, including (among others):

  • Shareholder Derivative Claims
  • Class Action Federal Securities Suits
  • SEC Investigations and Enforcement Actions
  • Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claims
  • Claw-Back Actions by Receivers and Trustees
  • Dodd-Frank/SOX Whistleblower Claims

The securities litigation experience of AM&R’s attorneys includes the representation of domestic and international corporations, investment banks, accounting firms, hedge fund directors, and professional advisors.

Shareholder and Securities Disputes Experience

Although each case we handle is unique, and the results our lawyers have obtained were the product of many case-specific factors which may differ from your case, the following summarizes some of our lawyers’ prior experience and results:

Represented publicly registered alternative fuel company in defense of hostile takeover attempt by the company's largest unit holder. After the unit holder refused to close on a $30,000,000 agreement for the repurchase of his interest in the company, the unit holder attempted to take control of the board of directors and filed a variety of claims against the company, members of its board, and the company's management, including state and federal securities fraud claims, breach of fiduciary duty claims, claims to enjoin investor votes, and claims alleging certain proxy statements were misleading. See Retterath v. Homeland Energy Solutions, LLC et al, 2014 WL 7776705 (S.D. Iowa Dec. 24, 2014); Retterath v. Homeland Energy Solutions, LLC, --- F.Supp.3d ----, 2014 WL 7776503 (S.D. Iowa 2014); Retterath v. Homeland Energy Solutions, LLC, 2014 WL 1515522 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 17, 2014).

Represented individual directors and corporate administrator of a $500 million offshore hedge fund in numerous lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions arising out of a complex valuation fraud scheme perpetrated by the hedge fund's investment manager. The various lawsuits included a securities fraud class action lawsuit brought by two individual investors, see Bruhl v. PricewaterhouseCoopers Int'l, 2007 WL 997362 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 27, 2007); a separate federal securities fraud lawsuit brought collectively by a large group of institutional investors, see Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities, LLC, 592 F. Supp. 2d 608 (S.D.N.Y. 2009), and claw-back and negligence-based claims brought by the hedge fund’s court-appointed receiver. See Court-Appointed Receiver of Lancer Offshore, Inc. v. Citco Group Limited, 2011 WL 1233126 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 30, 2011).

Defended international New York-based law firm's Board of Directors against breach of partnership agreement, breach of fiduciary duty, and defamation claims asserted by five of the firm's former equity partners. Yueh-Mei Kim Nutter, P.A. v. Schober, 2011 WL 1474864 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 4, 2011).

Prosecuted claims on behalf of a national client to prevent a competitor from closing of an operational merger and acquiring a certain target entity based on our client’s right of first refusal to purchase the target entity’s assets. The competitor offered the target entity $28,000,000, in addition to a recapitalization of an additional $25,000,000 to $50,000,000 of one of the target entity’s affiliates, as consideration for the merger.

Represented multinational financial institution that served as administrator and custodian of a multi-billion dollar hedge fund group in multiple lawsuits, including a federal securities class action lawsuit and shareholder derivative claims, arising out of the hedge funds’ losses caused by the Bernard L. Madoff Ponzi scheme. See Anwar v. Fairfield Greenwich Ltd., 2013 WL 662972 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2013); Stephenson v. Citco Group Limited, 700 F. Supp. 2d 599 (S.D.N.Y. 2010).

Represented an audit engagement partner from a Big Four accounting firm in connection with responding to a SEC Wells notice arising out of the restatement of a national restaurant chain's financial statements; SEC ultimately decided not to initiate an enforcement proceeding against our client.

Defended investment portfolio management company in defense of Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd Frank Act whistleblower claims.

The hiring of an attorney is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. Please note that each case is unique, and the result obtained in one case should not be relied upon as an indication of what the result will be in another. This website is for general informational purposes only and nothing contained herein should be construed as legal advice of any kind.