Washington Mutual Inc Case 08/20/2008
FEBRUARY 2012 - According to the Notice:
Statement of Plaintiff Recovery
Pursuant to the proposed Settlement described herein, a Settlement Fund consisting of $41.5 million in cash, plus interest, has been established. Lead Plaintiffs estimate that there were approximately 297.7 million shares of WMI common stock traded during the Class Period which may have been damaged. Lead Plaintiffs estimate that the average recovery per damaged share of WMI common stock under the Settlement is approximately $0.14 per damaged share2 before deduction of Court-awarded attorneys’ fees and expenses. A Class Member’s actual recovery will be a proportion of the Net Settlement Fund determined by that claimant’s Recognized Claim as compared to the total Recognized Claims of all Class Members who submit acceptable Proofs of Claim. Depending on the number of Proofs of Claim submitted, when during the Class Period a Class Member purchased shares of WMI common stock, the purchase price paid, and whether those shares were held at the end of the Class Period or sold during the Class Period, and, if sold, when they were sold and the amount received, an individual Class Member may receive more or less than this average amount. The precise amount of any Class Member’s recovery
will not be known until all Proofs of Claim have been submitted, reviewed and processed. See the Plan of Allocation beginning on page 12 for more information on your Recognized Claim.
Statement of Potential Outcome of Case
The parties disagree on both liability and damages with respect to the claims asserted by Lead Plaintiffs against Defendants in the Action, and do not agree on the average amount of damages per share that would be recoverable by Authorized Claimants if the Action were to continue to be litigated and Lead Plaintiffs were to prevail on each claim alleged. The issues on which the parties disagree include (a) whether the statements made or facts allegedly omitted were materially false, misleading, or otherwise actionable under the federal securities laws; (b) whether Defendants had the requisite scienter when the statements were made or facts were allegedly omitted; (c) whether loss causation and damages could be established; (d) the extent to which the various matters that Lead Plaintiffs alleged were materially false or misleading influenced (if at all) the trading price of WMI common stock at various times during the Class Period; (e) the extent to which the various allegedly adverse material facts that Lead Plaintiffs alleged were omitted influenced (if at all) the trading price of WMI common stock at various times during the Class Period; (f) the appropriate economic model for determining the amount by which WMI common stock was allegedly artificially inflated (if at all) during the Class Period; (g) the amount by which WMI common stock was allegedly artificially inflated (if at all) during the Class Period; (h) the effect of various market forces influencing the trading price of WMI common stock at various times during the Class Period; and (i)
the extent to which external factors, such as general market and industry conditions, influenced the trading price of WMI common stock at various times during the Class Period. Defendants deny that they are liable to Lead Plaintiffs or any other Class Members and deny that Lead Plaintiffs or any other Class Members have suffered any damages.
What is this lawsuit about?
WMI maintained a mortgage lending business until its bankruptcy, and was the second-largest mortgage loan originator in the United States by April of 2003.
Beginning in July 2004, a number of securities fraud class actions were filed in this Court. By Order dated November 30, 2004, those actions were consolidated into the Action. South Ferry LP #2 (“South Ferry”), Metzler Investment GmbH (“Metzler”), and Walden Management Company Pension Plan (“Walden”) were designated lead plaintiffs pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PSLRA”) and Milberg LLP (then known as Milberg Weiss Bershad &
Schulman LLP) was appointed Lead Counsel.
On March 1, 2005, South Ferry, Metzler, and Walden filed the Consolidated Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”) alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the Complaint alleged that, between April 15, 2003, and June 28, 2004, WMI, Killinger, Casey, Oppenheimer, William W. Longbrake (“Longbrake”), Craig J. Chapman (“Chapman”), and James G. Vanasek (“Vanasek”) made false and misleading statements that (1) WMI had successfully integrated the various technology platforms and operational processes from certain recent acquisitions, and (2) WMI was well-positioned to withstand market changes in interest rates because of its hedging operations and the natural counterbalance of its risk.