Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Suarez v. Advance Auto Parts, Inc. et al
Case Number:
5:23-cv-00563
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
- Glancy Prongay
- Higgins Benjamin
- Law Offices of James Scott Farrin
- Robbins Geller
- Smith Anderson Blount Dorsett Mitchell & Jernigan
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
January 23, 2025
Advanced Auto Parts Gets Brakes Tapped On Investor Suit
Advanced Auto Parts beat back a proposed class action on Thursday that accused the company and its top brass of misleading investors about the failure of a new pricing strategy and purposefully inflating the impact of price reductions, with a North Carolina federal judge finding that the suit failed to plead knowledge of wrongdoing.
-
June 24, 2024
Missed Forecasts 'Not Fraud,' Advance Auto Tells Investors
Advance Auto Parts Inc. and its top brass are looking to exit a proposed class action alleging they misled investors about the failure of a new pricing strategy and purposefully inflated the impact of price reductions, saying that missed forecasts and accounting errors "are not fraud."
-
October 10, 2023
Advance Auto Investor Says Execs Hid Failure Of Pricing Plan
Advance Auto Parts has been hit with a proposed class action in North Carolina federal court alleging it misled investors about the failure of a new pricing strategy and purposefully inflated the impact of price reductions, leading to a steep, one-day stock drop after the truth was revealed.