Lawsuit Overview
March 5, 2009 - The parties filed a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice.
February 12, 2009 - Defendants filed a motion to dismiss.
November 20, 2008 - The case was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
November 13, 2008 - Lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed.
September 26, 2008 - Lead plaintiff motion was filed.
July 28, 2008 - An investor filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on behalf of investors who purchased class A shares of certain multi-class MFS stock mutual funds in the aggregate amount of less than $50,000 between July 28, 2003 and July 28, 2008.
The complaint alleges that between July 28, 2003 and July 28, 2008, defendants engaged in a scheme to defraud investors by disseminating prospectuses for the following mutual funds that contain incorrect, incomplete and misleading information: Massachusetts Investors Growth Stock Fund (MIGFX); Massachusetts Investors Trust (MITTX); MFS Aggressive Growth Allocation Fund (MAAGX); MFS Conservative Allocation Fund (MACFX); MFS Core Equity Fund (MRGAX); MFS Core Growth Fund (MFCAX); MFS Emerging Growth Fund (MFEGX); MFS Emerging Markets Equity Fund (MEMAX); MFS Global Equity Fund (MWEFX); MFS Global Growth Fund (MWOFX); MFS Global Total Return Fund (MFWTX); MFS Growth Allocation Fund (MAGWX); MFS International Diversification Fund (MDIDX); MFS International Growth Fund (MGRAX); MFS International New Discovery Fund (MIDAX); MFS International Value Fund (MGIAX); MFS Mid Cap Growth Fund (OTCAX); MFS Mid Cap Value Fund (MVCAX); MFS Moderate Allocation Fund (MAMAX); MFS New Discovery Fund (MNDAX); MFS New Endeavor Fund (MECAX); MFS Research Fund (MFRFX); MFS Research International Fund (MRSAX); MFS Sector Rotational Fund (SRFAX); MFS Strategic Value Fund (MSVTX); MFS Technology Fund (MTCAX); MFS Total Return Fund (MSFRX); MFS Union Standard Equity Fund (MUEAX); MFS Utilities Fund (MMUFX); and MFS Value Fund (MEIAX).
According to the complaint, the defendants, in contravention of their disclosure obligations, knowingly presented class A shares as the best performing share class for the long-term, causing the class members to purchase class A shares of the aforementioned mutual funds, when class B and/or class C shares would have been their best investment choice for any holding period. By making misleading disclosures in, and omitting material information from, the prospectuses for these funds, defendants earned excessive profits while the plaintiff and other class members suffered decreased returns on their investments.