Securities Litigation: Dana Corp

Frank v. Dana Corporation
USDC ND Ohio
Guidance; Restatement

Company background

Litigation background

Lead plaintiffs

SEC disclosure

Higher-than-expected costs for steel and other materials, as well as increased energy costs
Press release 9.15.05
EDGAR filings

Complaint

Motion to Lift Discovery Stay Denied

Filings

Opinion

Filings

Response to judge's request

Supplemental filings

Opinion

Ruling

Sixth Circuit reversed dismissal of a class action securities fraud complaint because the Northern District of Ohio had used a tougher, pre-Tellabs standard for scienter:

"The district courts most plausible standard is derived from this Courts decision in [Helwig v. Vencor, Inc., 251 F.3d 540, 547 (6th Cir. 2001)], where the en banc Court held that 'the strong inference' requirement means that plaintiffs are entitled only to the most plausible of competing inferences. 251 F.3d at 553. After Tellabs, however, the standard adopted in Helwig is no longer good law. 127 S. Ct. at 2510 (expressly rejecting the most plausible of competing inferences standard applied in Fidel v. Farley, 392 F.3d 220, 227 (6th Cir. 2004), and Helwig, 251 F.3d at 553)."

Briefs

Lead plaintiff

Company defense

// This display the document title in the html page document.write(document.title);