The Globe and Mail

Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content

Globe Investor

News Sources

Take control of your investments with the latest investing news and analysis

Press release from Business Wire

Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Prudential Financial, Inc.

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Prudential Financial, Inc.12:31 EDT Thursday, August 23, 2012 WILMINGTON, Del. (Business Wire) -- Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the securities of Prudential Financial, Inc. (“Prudential” or the “Company”) (NYSE: PRU) between May 5, 2010 and November 2, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers and directors (the “Complaint”). If you purchased shares of Prudential during the Class Period and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, NY at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to info@rigrodskylong.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/prudential-financial-inc-pru. Prudential, a New Jersey corporation headquartered in Newark, New Jersey, through its subsidiaries and affiliates, offers a wide array of financial products and services, including life insurance, annuities, retirement-related services, mutual funds and investment management. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business operations, financial condition and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges (1) that the Company had not properly or adequately reserved for the payment of benefits to policyholders' beneficiaries when it knew or had reason to know the policyholders were deceased; (2) that the Company's historical processes, policies and procedures were inadequate to identify current liabilities related to policyholders who had died but whose beneficiary claims had not yet been made; (3) that the Defendants knew that the Company's financial results and guidance for its operating earnings or income during the Class Period were false; and (4) that the Company knowingly failed to reserve for losses that it knew it had already incurred. As a result of defendants' false and misleading statements, the Company's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. According to the Complaint, in its Form 10-Q filed on August 5, 2011 with the United States Securities and Exchange Commissions (“SEC”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, the Company disclosed that it was currently being investigated by a third party auditor on behalf of 33 jurisdictions concerning state unclaimed property laws. In addition, the Company disclosed that it had been subpoenaed by the New York Attorney General regarding its unclaimed property procedures. On this news, shares of the Company declined almost 11%, closing at $48.14 per share on August 8, 2011, on volume of over 11 million shares. Then, on November 2, 2011, the Company issued a press release announcing its financial results for the third quarter of 2011. The earnings results of $1.07 per common share missed Wall Street analyst consensus expectations of $1.54 per share. Also in this release, the Company reported that it had taken a $99 million charge to increase reserves related to its usage in the quarter of the Social Security Administration's Death Master File (“SSA-DMF”). On this news, shares of the Company declined from a close of $53.67 per share on November 2, 2011 to $53.05 per share on November 3, 2011 and to $52.19 per share on November 4, 2011. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October 22, 2012. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. While Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. did not file the Complaint in this matter, the firm, with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.Timothy J. MacFall, EsquirePeter Allocco888-969-4242516-683-3516Fax: 302-654-9430info@rigrodskylong.comhttp://www.rigrodskylong.com