Lawsuit Overview
August 7, 2019 - The case was voluntarily dismissed.
January 11, 2019 - An investor in shares of Markel Corporation (NYSE: MKL) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Markel Corporation in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between July 26, 2017 and December 6, 2018.
Glen Allen, VA based Markel Corporation, a diverse financial holding company, markets and underwrites specialty insurance products in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and internationally. Markel Corporation reported that its annual Total Revenue rose from over $5.61 billion in 2016 to over $6.06 billion in 2017 and that its Net INcome declined from $455.68 million in 2016 to $395.26 million in 2017. Shares of Markel Corporation (NYSE: MKL) grew from $825.07 per share in November 2016 to as high as $1,220.12 per share in September 2018.
On December 7, 2018, Markel Corporation disclosed that “after having been contacted on November 30, 2018, it is fully cooperating with inquiries by US and Bermuda authorities into loss reserves recorded in late 2017 and early 2018 at Markel CATCo Investment Management Ltd and its subsidiaries.” Shares of Markel Corporation (NYSE: MKL) declined to as low as $954.39 per share on December 24, 2018.
According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Markel Corporation (NYSE: MKL) common shares between July 26, 2017 and December 6, 2018, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws.
More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between July 26, 2017 and December 6, 2018, the Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that the Company’s subsidiaries did not appropriately record loss reserves, that, as a result, the loss reserves would need to be adjusted and/or restated, that these misleading accounting practices would lead to regulatory scrutiny and financial loss to investors, and that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.