For-Profit College Education Companies’ Common Stock Fraud
Zamansky & Associates LLC has launched an investigation on behalf of investors who purchased the common stock of for-profit college education companies listed below for violation of federal securities laws. On August 3, 2010, the U.S. General Accounting Office (”GAO”) issued a report that concluded that for-profit educational institutions had engaged in an illegal and fraudulent course of action designed to recruit students and overcharge the federal government for the cost of such education. The GAO investigated for-profit colleges in Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Texas and Washington, D.C. Recruiters at all 15 colleges studied by the GAO were found to have misled potential students about the costs, duration and quality of their programs.
ITT Educational Services Inc. (NASDAQ: ESI)
Apollo Group Inc. (NASDAQ: APOL)
Grand Canyon Education Inc. (NASDAQ: LOPE)
Corinthian Colleges Inc. (NASDAQ: COCO)
American Public Education Inc. (NASDAQ: EPI)
Bridgepoint Education, Inc. (NYSE: BPI)
Capella Education Company (Nasdaq: CPLA)
Career Education Corporation (Nasdaq: CECO)
Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (Nasdaq: COCO)
Education Management (Nasdaq: EDMC)
Lincoln Educational Services Co. (Nasdaq: LINC)
Strayer Education, Inc. (Nasdaq: STRA)
The Washington Post Company (NYSE: WPO)
Zamansky & Associates LLC is investigating whether these Companies engaged in false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose to investors: (1) their overstated growth prospects by engaging in illicit and improper recruiting activities, which also had the effect of artificially inflating the Companies’ reported results and future growth prospects; (2) the Companies’ financial results were overstated in that the Companies’ colleges inflated tuition costs and its student loan repayment rates were well below levels required for participation in federal loan programs; (3) the Companies failed to maintain adequate systems of internal operational or financial controls; and (4) the Companies lacked a basis for their positive statements about their financial results, their prospects and growth.
As a result of these revelations, the Companies’ stock prices fell substantially during the last several weeks, and may have been artificially inflated for several years.
One such class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California against Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (”Corinthian” or the “Company”) and certain of its top officials. The class action was filed on behalf of purchasers of Corinthian securities during the period of October 30, 2007 through and including August 19, 2010 (the “Class Period”). The Complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. There is a deadline for filing motion for appointment as lead Plaintiff motion so please contact us as soon as possible if you wish us to represent you in filing such a motion.
If you have suffered from financial losses in stocks for any of the Companies or other for-profit education colleges, you may have a legal claim to recover your losses or other damages. Please contact us as soon as possible to protect your rights.
Goldman Sachs and the SEC Take the Easy Road
by on July 15, 2010
The SEC deserved a lot of credit for filing the case against Goldman Sachs for its dubious creation of the ABACUS CDO transaction. To recall, Goldman created the ABACUS deal so that a hedge fund manager could short the mortgage market, and then sold the securities to an unsuspecting client without disclosing the investment was built to fail.
But while the SEC deserves plaudits for filing a challenging case, settling the case without requiring Goldman to address whether fraud was committed misses the point entirely. Moreover, this allows Goldman Sachs to avoid turning over potentially incriminating documents about the ABACUS deal, other CDO transactions and the failure by Goldman to disclose the Wells Notice it received after the SEC initially launched its investigation. Having filed a shareholder class action case against Goldman Sachs, it was a slight disappointment to see Goldman pay a fine rather than be truly held accountable for its actions. Speaking of which, while the fine appears to be substantial, its a drop in the bucket for Goldman Sachs, and the “admission” of a mistake was crafted by Goldman lawyers to be later able to deny liability.
To be sure, Goldman’s shareholders still have a strong case. The evidence will show that Goldman’s CDO transactions and its failure to disclose the Wells Notice was a violation of securities law and through private litigation, I remain confident they will be held accountable
Sean Coffey for NY Attorney General 2010
by on January 15, 2010
In the more than three decades I’ve been practicing securities arbitration law in New York, there has never been a candidate that has had the legal smarts, the experience, the integrity — and most of all — the independence to take on Wall Street. The New York Attorney General position too often has been sought by professional politicians more interested in advancing their political careers rather than truly serving the public good. Accordingly, they ultimately needed to curry favor with Wall Street and never took meaningful actions that would even limit, let alone eliminate, the industry’s systemic wrongdoing.
Enter, John P. (”Sean”) Coffey. Coffey is unquestionably one of the most successful trial attorneys in the U.S. and he’s been favorably profiled in various publications including The Wall Street Journal, American Lawyer, and Bloomberg Markets magazine. If the attorney general election were decided purely on accomplishments and experience, Coffey would handily win in a landslide. He has practiced law from multiple vantage points: as an assistant U.S. Attorney where he tried multiple cases to verdict; as partner in the top-tier law firm Latham & Watkins defending Fortune 500 companies; and as a partner with the class action law firm Bernstein Litowitz, one of the most prominent plaintiff’s firms in the country.
Coffey’s victories are too numerous to mention here, but of special relevance to New Yorkers is the historic $6 billion recovery he garnered as the lead attorney in the WorldCom securities litigation representing the New York State Common Retirement Fund and thousands of other aggrieved investors. What was especially significant about that settlement was the requirement that all of WorldCom’s outside directors pay a portion of the settlement from their personal funds.
Coffey has an ethical issue with companies using only shareholder money to pay fines and settlements, so you can rest assured that if he’s elected, the WorldCom settlement won’t remain an isolated instance. I expect that Coffey will mete out justice responsibly and fairly. He understands the meaning and responsibility of “prosecutorial discretion”.
It is said that an electorate gets the government it deserves. New York deserves to have a world-class attorney overseeing its levers of justice. Sadly, New York party politics being what they are, a political candidate of Coffey’s unparalleled caliber cannot be assured of victory even given the state’s pathetic state of affairs. At the end of the day, if New Yorkers are able to hear and meet Sean they will vote for and support him.