 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
REPORT OF EXPERT
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
COMMON FUND COURT LODESTAR PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL SETTLEMENT ATTORNEYS LAW BASIS AMOUNT SECURITIES LODESTAR CALCULATION CIR OPINION AWARD ECONOMICS DISCLOSURE CLASS ACTION DISCRETION ADJUSTMENT HOURLY RATE GLOBALIZING MARKET LAW SCHOOL BENCHMARK PROFESSIONAL SKILL LITIGATION INCENTIVES CONFERENCE ECONOMICS WORKSHOP |
In Re: NATIONAL TECH TEAM, INC.
Case No. 97-74587
REPORT OF COURT-APPOINTED EXPERT
PROFESSOR MERRITT B. FOX
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LAW SCHOOL
This report is filed pursuant to the Court's order of August 20, 1999, which
to serve as a court appointed expert under Fed. R. Evid. 706. The order requires me to
an opinion as to what amount of attorney fees and expenses in this case are "reasonable
circumstances," Rawlings v. Prudential-Bathe Properties Inc., 9 F.3d 513, 516 (6th Cir.
and as to whether a fee based on a percentage of the common fund, rather than based
lodestar calculation, is appropriate in this case. For the reasons set forth below, my
as follows:
1. It is within the discretion of the court to determine the fee for
basis of either the percentage of common fund approach or the lodestar approach.
2. If the court should choose to utilize the percentage of common fund
the Settlement Fund would constitute a reasonable award of attorney's fees under the
circumstances. This would result in a fee of approximately $2.42 million plus counsel's
pocket expenses and its pro-rata share of interest in the Fund.'
3. The lodestar approach appears to be less desirable in this case than the
common fund approach.
' The Settlement Fund consists of %I 1 million plus interest accrued since date of
SNIPPETS:
|
|
2
.
CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
SCIENTER GAAP EARNINGS TIME HIGH DAMAGES CLASS ACTION PRICES RANGING SHARES SALES LITERATURE NATIONAL TECHTEAM |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
IN RE NATIONAL TECHTEAM, INC. 1 Case No. 97-cv-74587
SECURITIES LITIGATION 1 Hon. Avern Cohn
CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs, by their attorneys,
Class Action Complaint (the VIComplaintt'),
upon personal knowledge as to themselves
upon information and belief based upon
plaintiffs' attorneys as to all other matters.
includes the thorough review and analysis
publicly-filed documents of National
TechTeam" or the "Companytt), press releases,
the review and analysis of accounting
literature.
1. Plaintiffs bring this action
behalf of a class (the lWClassl') consisting
other persons or entities who purchased
National TechTeam during the period September
November 14, 1997, inclusive (the "Class
damages caused to the class by Defendants'
federal securities laws.
2. Prior to the Class Period,
enjoyed dramatic revenue and income growth,
price to soar. However, beginning in mid-1996,
growth slowed to the point where the Company would have had to
report disappointing financial results in the fourth
1996, and would not have been able to achieve any profits
first quarter of 1997. However, to mask the Company's
results, defendants adopted a scheme to overstate
revenues through the improper utilization
software licensing transactions, and thereby artificially
the market price of the Company's stock.
3. Under this scheme, Defendants
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
