DIEBOLD, DIE NOW -- Part two

Scroll down for my first piece on the original class action lawsuit filed by Scott + Scott against the notorious Republican-friendly vote-theft enabler Diebold. Now we learn that another law firm is also going after our least-favorite voting machine company.

A complaint has been filed by a California firm called Stull, Stull & Brody. The main suit is described by the firm here:

The complaint alleges that defendants violated provisions of the United States securities laws causing artificial inflation of the Company’s stock price. According to the complaint, during the Class Period, the Company lacked a credible state of internal controls and corporate compliance and remained unable to assure the quality and working order of its voting machine products. It is further alleged that the Company’s false and misleading statements served to conceal the dimensions and scope of internal problems at the Company, impacting product quality, strategic planning, forecasting and guidance and culminating in false representations of astonishingly low and incredibly inaccurate restructuring charges for the 2005 fiscal year, which grossly understated the true costs and problems defendants faced to restructure the Company. The complaint also alleges over $2.7 million of insider trading proceeds obtained by individual defendants during the Class Period.

Finally, investors learned the truth about the adverse impact of the Company’s alleged defective and deficient inventory-related controls and systems on Diebold’s financial performance. As a result of defendants’ shocking news and disclosures of September 21, 2005, the price of Diebold shares plunged 15.5% on unusually high volume, falling from $44.37 per share on September 20, 2005, to $37.47 per share on September 21, 2005, for a one-day drop of $6.90 per share on volume of 6.1 million shares – nearly eight times the average daily trading volume.

This is similar to the suit described earlier. To tell the truth, I'm still not sure whether this counts as an entirely separate lawsuit (as a Daily Kos diarist has alleged) or whether a second firm has somehow glommed onto the originial case.

Stull, Stull & Brody is filing still another action concerning misuse of the 401(k) plan.

What's the big picture? As I say below: Diebold is vulnerable, and they aren't in any kind of a position to bribe their way out of jams. Right now, there are counties and states making the decision whether or not to use this equipment. I list contact information in the post below.

Send them email. This is one of the few times when I really do beleive that your voice can make a difference.