Class Action

Class Action Defense Cases-In re Peregrine Systems: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Joint Defense/Plaintiff Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation In Southern District of California

By Michael J. Hassen

Judicial Panel Grants Defense Request for Pretrial Coordination of 35 Class Action and Individual Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Joined by Sole Plaintiff Outside California, and Transfers Actions to Southern District of California

Thirty-five (35) individual and class action lawsuits (34 in California and 1 in New Jersey) were filed against various defendants, including Arthur Andersen, “arising out of alleged misrepresentations or omissions relating to improper accounting practices at Peregrine Systems, Inc. In re Peregrine Systems, Inc. Securities Litig., ___ F.Supp.2d ___ (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit. January 2, 2008) [Slip Opn., at 1]. Defense attorneys for Arthur Andersen and New Jersey plaintiff’s lawyer filed a motion with the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) requesting centralization of the litigation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 in the Southern District of California; no other party responded to the motion. Id. The Judicial Panel granted the motion to centralize the individual and class action lawsuits, and agreed that the Southern District of California was the appropriate transferee court. Id. Accordingly, the Panel transferred the New Jersey action to California, id., at 2.

Full post as published by Class Action Defense Blog on February 15, 2008 (boomark / email).