West Palm Beach Firefighters' Pension Fund v. Hasbro, Inc.
West Palm Beach Firefighters’ Pension Fund, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Hasbro, Inc., et al.
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:24-cv-08633
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 13
In West Palm Beach Firefighters’ v. Hasbro, Judge Broderick appointed Miami Retirement Trust and West Palm Beach Firefighters as lead plaintiffs and approved their counsel.
The appointed lead plaintiffs, the proposed class of Hasbro investors, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, and the other groups that sought appointment as lead plaintiff.
What happened
West Palm Beach Firefighters’ Pension Fund v. Hasbro, Inc. is a proposed securities-fraud class action alleging that Hasbro and certain executives misled investors about the quality and amount of Hasbro’s inventory. The case alleges violations of federal securities laws after Hasbro’s share price declined following disclosures in 2023.
Miami General Employees’ & Sanitation Employees’ Retirement Trust and West Palm Beach Firefighters asked to be appointed together as the lead plaintiffs, meaning the investors who direct the proposed class action. They also asked the court to approve Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP as lead counsel. Two other groups filed competing motions, but later stated that they did not oppose the Miami and West Palm Beach group’s motion.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted the Miami and West Palm Beach group’s motion to serve as lead plaintiff and approved Bernstein Litowitz as lead counsel. He denied the two competing lead-plaintiff motions as moot, meaning the court did not decide them on their merits because the other groups had effectively withdrawn their requests.
The detailed version
- West Palm Beach Firefighters' Pension Fund v. Hasbro, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-08633
- Vernon Broderick
- Aug. 29, 2025
Background
West Palm Beach Firefighters’ Pension Fund brought a proposed securities-fraud class action against Hasbro, Inc. and several senior executives. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 by making misleading statements and failing to disclose information about the quality and level of Hasbro’s inventory and its retailers’ inventory. The opinion states that Hasbro’s share price fell after disclosures concerning fourth-quarter 2022 results and third-quarter 2023 results.
Motions for Lead Plaintiff
The court considered three motions seeking appointment as lead plaintiff and approval of lead counsel under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. Philadelphia Asbestos Workers Pension & Health & Welfare Funds filed one motion. Miami General Employees’ & Sanitation Employees’ Retirement Trust and West Palm Beach Firefighters filed another, seeking to serve collectively and to select Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP as lead counsel. Birmingham Retirement and Relief System filed the third.
The Philadelphia and Birmingham groups later filed notices of non-opposition to the Miami and West Palm Beach motion. The defendants took no position on the appointment motions, apart from requesting that any appointment be without prejudice and objecting to certain requests made by Birmingham. The Miami and West Palm Beach motion therefore became unopposed.
Court’s Analysis
The court applied the lead-plaintiff procedures in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. Those procedures generally favor the class member or group with the largest financial interest who also meets the notice, filing, and basic representative requirements under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court found that the statutory notice and filing requirements were satisfied. The notice was published on the same day the complaint was filed, and the Miami and West Palm Beach group timely filed its motion by the deadline.
The group claimed a financial loss of $1,726,068 from its Hasbro transactions. Because no party objected to that claim, the court found that the group satisfied the largest-financial-interest requirement. The court also found that the group met Rule 23’s typicality and adequacy requirements at this stage. Both institutions purchased Hasbro common stock during the class period, so their claims arose from the same conduct and injuries alleged on behalf of the other proposed class members. The court also accepted their description of their ability to work together and supervise the litigation, and found no evidence that they would be unable to represent the class fairly and adequately.
The court further concluded that two institutional investors could serve collectively as lead plaintiff. It approved the group’s selection of Bernstein Litowitz as lead counsel after reviewing the firm’s filings and résumé and finding the firm experienced and capable of representing the class.
Disposition
The court GRANTED Miami General Employees’ & Sanitation Employees’ Retirement Trust and West Palm Beach Firefighters’ motion to be appointed collectively as lead plaintiff and to approve Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP as lead counsel. The court DENIED as moot the competing motions filed by Philadelphia Asbestos Workers Pension & Health & Welfare Funds and Birmingham Retirement and Relief System. The Clerk was directed to terminate the three pending motions, and the parties were directed to file a proposed schedule for any answer or responsive motion within fourteen days.
Read the full 13-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.