Motley Rice - Attorneys at Law
Navigation
Main navigation
Motley Rice represents clients across many areas.
Learn about the cases Motley Rice is actively representing clients in or cases that we've litigated previously.
Ozempic® users are filing lawsuits for vision loss, ileus, and other serious injuries.
Lawsuits allege talcum powder use is linked to reproductive organ cancer for women.
Lawsuits allege toxic heavy metals in baby food damage infants’ brain development.
Social media companies are being sued over alleged teenage mental health harms.
Meta is being sued for teenage mental health harms allegedly caused by Facebook and Instagram.
Women hurt by birth control drugs and devices may be eligible to sue over their injuries.
Studies link hair relaxers to uterine/ovarian cancer. Lawsuits seek to hold companies accountable.
Family members may have been eligible to file Camp Lejeune water contamination lawsuits.
People are filing gastroparesis lawsuits after using drugs like Ozempic®, Wegovy® and Mounjaro™.
While litigation can take years to complete from start to finish, our firm is always working for our clients, no matter how long it takes or how hard it gets.
Motley Rice attorneys and support personnel are dedicated to representing clients and working with co-counsel located throughout the United States and around the world.
Comprehensive, up-to-date news on the issues surrounding the litigation areas of Motley Rice LLC.
News, Learn about the latest happenings from lawsuits and other events impacting plaintiffs.
Motley Rice lawyers share their insights on litigation and more to inform people exploring their legal options.
This case is no longer active
Post-Acquisition Complications: Sprint Nextel
The Legal Team
When one major corporation acquires another, the purchasing company may attempt to conceal complications that develop during the takeover transition that may result in significant financial losses, negatively impacting shareholders.
On August 12, 2015, the Court granted final approval to a $131 million settlement* in Cora E. Bennett v. Sprint Nextel Corp., et al. This securities class action alleged that Sprint Nextel and certain of its senior executives made false and misleading statements concerning the financial benefits of the merger between Sprint Corp. and Nextel Communications, the integration of the two companies’ cellular platforms, and the credit quality of the combined company’s customer base.
*Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Sprint Corporation, a telecommunications company, acquired Nextel Communications in August 2005. Soon after the acquisition took place, plaintiffs alleged, “cultural differences” between the two companies, including that “rapidly divided legacy Sprint and Nextel personnel . . . and technological differences all but eliminated any chance of consolidating the [two] networks.”
In January 2008, Sprint’s 2007 fourth quarter report revealed a net loss of 683,000 post-paid subscribers. That same day, its stock dipped by almost 25 percent. A month later, Sprint announced that "the company recorded a non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $29.7 billion," contributing to a "net loss for the quarter [of] $29.5 billion or $10.36 diluted loss per share.” This announcement was followed by another dip in stock value by about 20 percent.
In a little more than six months, Sprint Nextel stock fell almost 70 percent from its class period high of $23.25 per share to less than $7.15 per share.
On behalf of investors who purchased stock between October 26, 2006, and February 27, 2008, Motley Rice and co-counsel filed this class action, which alleged that Sprint and former executive officers Gary D. Forsee (Chairman and CEO), Paul N. Saleh (CFO) and William G. Arendt (VP and Controller) attempted to cover up growing customer-base and integration problems while falsely inflating its publicly traded securities price. When the truth was finally revealed about these issues, the complaint alleged, stock value plummeted and investors suffered billions of dollars in damages.
The case is Cora E. Bennett v. Sprint Nextel Corp. et al., No. 2:09-cv-02122, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas.*Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.