7-Eleven, Inc.

In re 7-Eleven, Inc. Shareholders Litigation
Case Number 0508944-M
District Court of Texas
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was one of the principal plaintiffs’ counsel in a shareholder class action which caused 7-Eleven Japan to increase the price it was paying for the portion of 7-Eleven it did not already own by $145 million.

AMICAS, Inc.

Progress Associates v. AMICAS, Inc., et. al.
Master File No. 10-412-BLS2 and 10-0174-BLS2
Superior Court of Suffolk County, Massachusetts
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was one of two plaintiffs’ lead counsel in a shareholder class action which, following the issuance of an injunction enjoining a prior merger from closing, resulted in an additional $31 million being paid to AMICAS’s shareholders.

Comair Holdings Inc.

In re Comair Holdings Inc., Shareholders Litigation
Case Number 99-CI-1213
Circuit Court of Boone County, Kentucky
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was one of plaintiffs’ lead counsel in a class action suit which challenged the actions of the directors of Comair Holdings, Inc. in selling the company to its largest shareholder, Delta Air Lines, Inc., while discouraging other bidders through the imposition of a $50 million break-up fee. A settlement was reached whereby defendants agreed, among other things, to rescind that break-up fee in its entirety – a settlement which drew substantial praise from the Court for The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C.’s efforts.

Chiron Corp.

In re Chiron Shareholder Deal Litigation,
Case No. 05-2305667
Superior Court of Alameda County, California  

The BLF was one of principal plaintiffs’ counsel in a shareholder class action which caused Novartis to increase an offer for that portion of Chiron Corporation it did not already own by over $300 million.

Hampden Bancorp, Inc.

Levy v. Hampden Bancorp, Inc., et al.
Case No. 15-00082
Superior Court of Hampden County, Massachusetts
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was principal plaintiff’s counsel in a shareholder class action which resulted in post-closing litigation and a settlement amount of $1.8 million for shareholders of Hampden Bancorp, Inc.

Harrah’s Entertainment Inc.

In Re Harrah’s Entertainment Inc. Shareholder Litigation
Case Number 2453-N
Delaware Court of Chancery
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was one of principal plaintiffs’ counsel in a shareholder class action which Harrah’s board of directors acknowledged to the Court resulted in over $1.6 billion additional dollars being paid to Harrah’s shareholders.

Intimate Brands, Inc.

In re Intimate Brands, Inc. Shareholder Litigation
Case No. 19380
Delaware Court of Chancery
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was one of an Executive Committee of plaintiffs’ counsel in a case that resulted in a settlement where the defendants agreed to pay shareholders tens of millions of dollars in additional money for their stock in Intimate Brands.

Merrimac Industries, Inc.

Hex Partners v. Mason N. Carter, et al.
Case Number L-246-10
Superior Court of Essex County, New Jersey
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was principal plaintiff’s counsel in a shareholder class action which resulted in post-closing litigation and a settlement amount of $2 million for shareholders of Merrimac Industries, Inc.

Pan Pacific Retail Properties, Inc.

Jack G. Blaz v. Pan Pacific Retail Properties, et al.
Case Number 03-C-06-008085
Circuit Court for Baltimore County, Maryland
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was co-lead counsel in a shareholder class action which resulted in an additional $9.7 million being paid to shareholders.

Powerwave Technologies, Inc.

Crafton, et. al. v. Powerwave Technologies, Inc., et al.
Case Number 07-65
United States District Court, Central District of California
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was co-lead counsel for plaintiffs in a shareholder class lawsuit alleging securities fraud claim against Powerwave Technologies, Inc. which resulted in $3,150,000 in cash being paid to Powerwave’s shareholders. In appointing The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. as a co-lead counsel for plaintiffs, the United States District Court for the Central District of California noted that The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. has shown that it has extensive experience litigating securities class actions.

Protection One, Inc.

Trading Strategies Fund v. Ezersky, et. al.
Case Number 10-CV-333
District Court of Douglas County, Kansas
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was lead counsel in a shareholder class action which, following the issuance of a temporary restraining order enjoining a Tender Offer from closing, resulted in an additional $3.25 million in consideration being paid to shareholders in connection with the purchase of Protection One, Inc. by Golder Rauner II, L.L.C. and its affiliates.

Siliconix Inc.

In re Siliconix Inc. Shareholders Litigation
Case Number 1143-NC
Delaware Court of Chancery
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was one of plaintiffs’ lead counsel in a shareholder class action alleging that the majority shareholder of Siliconix was trying to acquire the remainder of the company for an unfairly low price. The case settled to the approval of the Court based on a $31.8 million increase in the price to be paid for the remainder of company.

Sprint Corp.

In re Sprint Corporation Shareholders Litigation
Case No. 04-CV-01714
District Court of Johnson County, Kansas
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was one of the plaintiffs’ lead counsel appointed by the Court to prosecute this shareholder class action asserting self-interest by the directors of Sprint Corporation in recombining a tracking stock dedicated to its wireless businesses back into the company as a whole. The case ultimately settled for $59 million paid to the Class.

Xicor, Inc.

In re Xicor, Inc. S’holder Litigation
Master File Number 1-04-CV-017801
Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California
The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. was co-lead counsel in a shareholder class action with resulted in an additional $2 million in consideration being paid to shareholders in connection with Intersil Corp.’s purchase of Xicor.