Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re McKesson HBOC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


April 27, 2005

IN RE MCKESSON HBOC, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Ronald M. Whyte United States District Judge

And Related Cases

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE FOR CONSIDERING PROPOSED SETTLEMENT REVISIONS

Lead Plaintiff, the New York State Common Retirement Fund ("Lead Plaintiff") and defendants McKesson Corporation ("McKesson") and McKesson Information Solutions, Inc. ("HBOC") (collectively "Settling Defendants" or "McKesson") reached an agreement to settle the present class action suit against McKesson, HBOC, and Mark Pulido, Richard Hawkins, Heidi Yodowitz, Charles McCall, Jay Gilbertson, Albert Bergonzi, Michael Smeraski, and Jay Lapine ("Individual Released Defendants"). The Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement ("Stipulation") signed on February 11, 2005 does not resolve claims against Arthur Andersen, LLP ("Andersen") and Bear Stearns & Co. ("Bear Stearns") (collectively "Non-Settling Defendants").

The parties appeared for a preliminary settlement hearing on March 25, 2005. Following the hearing, the court was informed that Lead Plaintiff and Settling Defendants were considering revisions to the exhibits attached to the Stipulation of Settlement to address concerns expressed at the hearing. On April 21, 2005, after circulating them to the Non-Settling Defendants, Lead Plaintiff submitted a Revised Proposed Judgment ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING DATES PENDING FINAL DISPOSITION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-C-99-20743 and a Revised Notice of Pendency and Settlement of Class Action to the court. Non-Settling Defendants continue to have objections to the Revised Proposed Judgment and, through Lead Plaintiff, have requested the court set a briefing schedule and hearing on the matter.

The parties originally stipulated to a briefing schedule wherein the last filing would be due on May 19, 2005. Lead Plaintiff was later informed of the court's unavailability between May 23, 2005 and June 9, 2005. Lead Plaintiff's attempt to secure a stipulation with the Non-Settling parties to shorten the agreed-upon briefing schedule has been unavailing.

Because the court is reluctant to compress the parties' time for briefing, it sets the following schedule: 1. By May 9, 2005, Bear Stearns and Arthur Andersen may file objections of no more than 15 pages each to the revisions made to the Proposed Judgment.

2. By May 16, 2005, Lead Plaintiff, in a brief of no more than 15 pages, and McKesson, in briefs of no more than 20 pages total, shall respond to the objections.

3. By May 19, 2005 at noon, Bear Stearns and Arthur Andersen may file a reply to the responses of no more than 10 pages each. Bear Stearns and Arthur Andersen should send courtesy copies of their replies directly to chambers.

4. The court will hear argument on the matter on May 20, 2005 at 9:00 a. m.

The court will consider the material submitted as ordered hereby in preparation for the hearing, however, the parties are advised that the court may not issue a ruling at the time of the hearing. Should no ruling issue on May 20, 2005, the court will endeavor to issue a ruling as soon as possible after June 9, 2005.

ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING DATES PENDING FINAL DISPOSITION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-C-99-20743

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this order to co-counsel, as necessary.

20050427

© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.