Company: MHLA
Filing Date: 2025-03-10
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0001412100-25-000011
Chunk: 103

Company: Maiden Holdings, Ltd.
Filing Date: 2025-03-10
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 3
Chunk 103
---
 16, 2021, Mr. Turin filed a petition for review of the Administrative Law Judge's decision with the Administrative Review Board in the U.S. Department of Labor. On June 29, 2023, the Administrative Review Board issued a decision and order which summarily affirmed the September 2, 2021 decision and order of the Administrative Law Judge. The decision and order of the Administrative Review Board became the final order of the Secretary of Labor on July 27, 2023. On July 28, 2023, Mr. Turin filed a petition for review of the final order of the Secretary of Labor in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Secretary of Labor is the respondent before the Second Circuit and the Court granted the Company's petition to intervene in order to present its position to the Court. On November 13, 2024, the Second Circuit found Turin’s arguments to be without merit and denied the petition for review.

A putative class action complaint was filed against Maiden Holdings, Arturo M. Raschbaum, Karen L. Schmitt, and John M. Marshaleck in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on February 11, 2019. On February 19, 2020, the Court appointed lead plaintiffs, and on May 1, 2020, lead plaintiffs filed an amended class action complaint (the “Amended Complaint”). The Amended Complaint asserts violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 (and Section 20(a) for control person liability) arising in large part from allegations that Maiden failed to take adequate loss reserves in connection with reinsurance provided to AmTrust. Plaintiffs further claim that certain of Maiden Holdings’ representations concerning its business, underwriting and financial statements were rendered false by the allegedly inadequate loss reserves, that these misrepresentations inflated the price of Maiden Holdings' common stock, and that when the truth about the misrepresentations was revealed, the Company’s stock price fell, causing Plaintiffs to incur losses. On September 11, 2020, a motion to dismiss was filed on behalf of all Defendants. On August 6, 2021, the Court issued an order denying, in part, Defendants’ motion to dismiss, ordering Plaintiffs to file a shorter amended complaint no later than August 20, 2021, and permitting discovery to proceed on a limited basis. On February 7, 2023, the