(Total Views: 399)
Posted On: 06/28/2025 9:17:24 PM
Post# of 154723
Here’s Brian Courter and Courter and Sons, LLC.
Kelly and Mulholland may have exercised options in violation of law. (Research required into that particular behavior)
“…that two of the former officer defendants strategically timed their exercise of options to sell their stock, in violation of Exchange Act Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, Section 20(a), and Section 20A.”
https://www.vitallaw.com/news/fraud-and-manip...le.com%2F#.
This is a court proceeding regarding Brian Courter.
“The remaining movants for lead plaintiff were Movant Smila Kodali and Movant Brian Joe Courter and Courter and Sons, LLC (collectively “Courter”).
Kodali and Courter hotly contested who suffered the greater loss and therefore had the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class. On August 19, 2021, the Court granted Courter's motion for appointment as lead plaintiff and approval of selection of counsel, concluding that Courter had the largest financial interest and was the most adequate plaintiff, and denied Kodali's motion. Dkt. 65.
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/617bcf9...25df6ca484
Kelly and Mulholland may have exercised options in violation of law. (Research required into that particular behavior)
“…that two of the former officer defendants strategically timed their exercise of options to sell their stock, in violation of Exchange Act Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, Section 20(a), and Section 20A.”
https://www.vitallaw.com/news/fraud-and-manip...le.com%2F#.
This is a court proceeding regarding Brian Courter.
“The remaining movants for lead plaintiff were Movant Smila Kodali and Movant Brian Joe Courter and Courter and Sons, LLC (collectively “Courter”).
Kodali and Courter hotly contested who suffered the greater loss and therefore had the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class. On August 19, 2021, the Court granted Courter's motion for appointment as lead plaintiff and approval of selection of counsel, concluding that Courter had the largest financial interest and was the most adequate plaintiff, and denied Kodali's motion. Dkt. 65.
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/617bcf9...25df6ca484
(7)
(0)
