An investor’s decision about whether to pursue a securities case is a complex and important decision. Pomerantz utilizes a methodical and client-specific approach to case evaluation. We have no interest in building an “inventory” of cases, but rather in selecting only meritorious cases that warrant pursuit.
Once a potential securities fraud claim impacting a client is identified via portfolio monitoring, we analyze the client’s potential damages. If we determine that the client was significantly “damaged” due to the alleged fraud, we analyze the merits of the case by studying publicly available information, including all available SEC filings, equity research analyst reports, web sites, and business media coverage. When warranted, we retain outside experts, such as forensic accountants, industry experts, corporate finance professionals, and private investigators to assist in these tasks.
Based upon this analysis, we provide our clients with recommendations concerning whether they should: (1) move to be appointed lead plaintiff; (2) file an individual non-class action in federal or state court; or (3) take no active role, that is, remain a class member in an action initiated by others. We also discuss and pursue any objectives the client may have relative to the subject company, and any corporate governance reform issues which may be addressed through litigation.
THE BEST INTERESTS
OF OUR CLIENTS
Our recommendations to clients on whether to seek lead to named plaintiff status are based on our thorough analysis of the strength of their claim, the size of their losses, the potential for recovery, and the ability to influence corporate governance or corporate conduct.