Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against defendants Beacon Associates Management Corp. ("Beacon Associates"), Joel Danziger, Esq. ("Danziger"), Harris Markhoff, Esq. ("Markhoff"), Ivy Asset Management Corp. ("Ivy Asset Management"), the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation ("BONY"), Friedberg Smith & Co., P.C. ("Friedberg Smith") and John Does 1-100 (collectively, the "Defendants"), on behalf of all persons, other than Defendants, who invested in Beacon Associates LLC I (the "Fund") from August 9, 2004 until the present (the "Class Period"), and derivatively on behalf of the nominal defendant, Beacon Associates LLC I, to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and common law claims, including breach of fiduciary duties.
The case name is styled Cacoulidis v. Beacon Associates Management Corp., et al., 09 civ. 00777. A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on the Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP website at www.whafh.com.
The Complaint asserts that during the Class Period, unbeknownst to investors, Defendant Beacon Associates, the Managing Member of the Fund, concentrated more than half of the Fund's investment capital with entities managed by Bernard Madoff ("Madoff") or Madoff-related entities. Investors who entrusted their savings to Beacon Associates suffered millions in damages as a result of Madoff's fraudulent scheme.
This Complaint alleges that Defendants failed to perform the necessary due diligence that they were being compensated to perform as investment advisors, managers and fiduciaries, and proximately caused millions of dollars in losses. Defendants either knew or should have known that the Fund's assets were employed as part of a massive Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Madoff. Defendants ignored numerous red flags, including the abnormally high and stable positive investment results reportedly achieved by Madoff regardless of market conditions; inconsistencies between Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, LLC's ("BMIS") publicly available financial information concerning its assets and the purported amounts that Madoff managed for clients; and the fact that BMIS was audited by a small, obscure accounting firm.
Additionally, Defendants Beacon Associates, Danziger and Markhoff issued an Offering Memorandum that was false and misleading because it falsely stated that the Fund's assets would be invested in a number of investment vehicles, including a "Large Cap Strategy adopted by Beacon Associates itself, when in reality, unbeknownst to investors, the vast majority of the assets in the Fund were invested in Madoff-controlled entities. The Offering Memorandum also falsely stated that Beacon Associates would monitor the Fund's performance as well as the performance of each third party manager of the Fund's assets, to ensure that they adhered to their stated investment objectives. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants Beacon Associates, Danziger, Markhoff, and Ivy Asset Management, with no or inadequate due diligence or oversight, abdicated their responsibilities and entrusted the Fund's assets to Madoff-run investment vehicles. Plaintiffs further allege that Defendant Friedberg Smith failed to conduct a proper audit of the Fund's financial statements. Finally, Plaintiffs allege aiding and abetting claims against Ivy Asset Management and BONY.
Plaintiffs have alleged claims on behalf of the Class for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, Rule 10b-5, as well as common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, gross negligence and mismanagement, unjust enrichment, and aiding and abetting claims. Plaintiffs are also suing derivatively on behalf of the Fund for breach of fiduciary duty, gross negligence and mismanagement, unjust enrichment, and aiding and abetting.
If you invested in Beacon Associates LLC I during the Class Period, you may request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff by April 3, 2009.
A "lead plaintiff" is a representative party that acts 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. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as lead plaintiffs. Your ability to share in any recovery, however, is not affected by your decision on whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Wolf Haldenstein, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.
Wolf Haldenstein has extensive experience in the prosecution of securities class actions and derivative litigation in state and federal trial and appellate courts across the country. The firm has approximately 70 attorneys in various practice areas; and offices in Chicago, New York City, San Diego, and West Palm Beach. The reputation and expertise of this firm in shareholder and other class litigation has been repeatedly recognized by the courts, which have appointed it to major positions in complex securities multi-district and consolidated litigation. Please visit the Wolf Haldenstein website ( http://www.whafh.com) for more information about the firm. |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
