Shareholder Alert: The Ademi Firm investigates whether Enhabit Inc. is obtaining a Fair Price for its Public Shareholders [Accessibility Statement] Skip NavigationMILWAUKEE, Feb. 23, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Ademi LLP is investigating Enhabit (NYSE: EHAB) for possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of law in its recently announced transaction with Kinderhook Industries.Click [here] to learn how to join our investigation and obtain additional information or contact us at [[email protected]] or t ...

Shareholder Alert: The Ademi Firm investigates whether Mister Car Wash Inc. is obtaining a Fair Price for its Public Shareholders [Accessibility Statement] Skip NavigationMILWAUKEE, Feb. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Ademi LLP is investigating Mister Car Wash (NASDAQ: MCW) for possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of law in its recently announced transaction with Leonard Green & Partners.Click [here] to learn how to join our investigation and obtain additional information or contact us at [[em ...

Core Viewpoint - Johnson Fistel, PLLP is investigating potential shareholder derivative claims against Starbucks Corporation regarding alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by certain officers and directors, following a securities class action related to the company's stock performance during a specified period [1][3]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The investigation is prompted by a securities class action complaint alleging that Starbucks and its senior executives made materially false and misleading statements and failed to disclose adverse facts [3]. - On April 30, 2024, Starbucks announced disappointing second-quarter fiscal 2024 results and lowered its full-year guidance, leading to a stock price drop from $88.49 to $74.44, a decline of over 15% in one day [3]. - The focus of the investigation includes whether the board of directors and senior management allowed misconduct, failed to implement adequate disclosure and risk-management controls, and exposed the company to financial and reputational harm [4]. Group 2: Shareholder Actions - Current Starbucks shareholders who held shares continuously before November 2, 2023, may have standing to pursue derivative claims on behalf of the company [2]. - Shareholders are encouraged to seek more information through the law firm's website or contact the lead analyst for further assistance [2].

Core Viewpoint - An investigation is underway regarding Uber's Board of Directors for potential breaches of fiduciary duties related to oversight of rider safety and driver's background checks [1]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The investigation is being conducted by Berger Montague PC, a national plaintiffs' law firm [1]. - Shareholders are encouraged to contact Berger Montague for more information regarding the investigation [2]. Group 2: Company Overview - Uber Technologies, Inc. is a multinational transportation company based in San Francisco, offering ride-hailing, courier services, food delivery, and freight transportation through its digital platform [2]. - The law firm Berger Montague has a strong track record in complex civil litigation, having recovered over $50 billion for clients over its 55-year history [2].

Group 1 - The importance of working with a fiduciary financial advisor in the U.S. is emphasized, as not all advisors are required to prioritize clients' interests [1][2] - Registered Investment Advisers (RIAs) are legally obligated to act as fiduciaries, which includes a duty of care and a duty of loyalty towards their clients [2][3] - The duty of care requires advisors to understand clients' financial situations and make recommendations that serve their best interests [2] - The duty of loyalty mandates that advisors must prioritize clients' interests over their own and disclose any potential conflicts of interest [3] Group 2 - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has reaffirmed that fiduciary obligations cannot be waived by contract or disclosure, making it illegal for fiduciary advisors to act against clients' best interests [3] - To determine if an advisor is a fiduciary, clients should directly ask the advisor about their fiduciary status during initial conversations [4] - Public databases such as the Investment Adviser Public Disclosure (IAPD) website can be used to verify if an advisor is registered, the services they provide, and any disciplinary history [5] - The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority's (FINRA) BrokerCheck tool can be utilized to review the licensing, employment history, and any complaints against advisors who also sell securities [6]

Core Viewpoint - Johnson Fistel, PLLP is investigating potential derivative claims against General Motors Company regarding alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by certain officers and directors, following a securities class action related to GM securities purchased between February 2, 2022, and October 26, 2023 [1][3]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The investigation is prompted by allegations that GM and its senior executives made materially false or misleading statements and failed to disclose significant adverse facts, including issues related to vehicle airbag inflators, the safety of Cruise LLC's autonomous vehicle technology, and increased risks of regulatory scrutiny and legal liabilities [3][4]. - Reports of serious accidents involving Cruise AVs, regulatory hearings on defective airbags, and the suspension of Cruise's driverless testing permits have contributed to a decline in GM's stock, allegedly harming investors [3][4]. Group 2: Shareholder Actions - Current GM shareholders who held shares continuously since before February 2, 2022, may have the standing to pursue derivative claims on behalf of GM [2]. - Shareholders seeking more information are encouraged to visit the law firm's website or contact the lead analyst directly [2].

Core Viewpoint - River Road Asset Management expresses significant disappointment with UniFirst's Board and management for rejecting a proposed acquisition by Cintas, which was seen as a breach of fiduciary duty and detrimental to shareholder interests [2][6]. Company Performance - UniFirst's financial performance peaked in FY19, but the company has since struggled with labor and benefits inflation, merchandise cost pressure, and limited pricing power to offset these challenges [3][6]. - Under CEO Steve Sintros, UniFirst has lagged behind Cintas in key operational metrics, leading to a widening valuation gap between the two companies [4][6]. Strategic Alternatives - River Road advocates for the exploration of strategic alternatives, including a potential sale of UniFirst, to maximize shareholder value and mitigate execution risks associated with the current operational strategy [7]. Market Context - The competitive landscape in the laundry industry emphasizes the importance of scale, with route density providing advantages in margins and service levels [3]. - The rejection of the Cintas offer has led to a decline in UniFirst's stock price, which has fallen below pre-offer levels, reflecting ongoing operational challenges and a lack of confidence in future growth [6].

Core Viewpoint - The law firm Brodsky & Smith is investigating potential claims against the Board of Directors of Semrush Holdings, Inc. for possible breaches of fiduciary duty related to the company's sale to Adobe for $12.00 per share, totaling approximately $1.9 billion [1][2]. Group 1 - The investigation focuses on whether the Semrush Board failed to conduct a fair process and whether the sale price represents fair value for shareholders, especially since it is below the 52-week high of $18.74 for Semrush shares [2]. - The sale price of $12.00 per share indicates a significant discount compared to the company's recent trading performance, raising concerns about the adequacy of the offer [2]. Group 2 - Brodsky & Smith is a litigation law firm with a strong track record in representing shareholders in securities and class action lawsuits, having successfully recovered millions for clients [4]. - The firm is offering to discuss the legal implications of the investigation with Semrush shareholders without any obligation or cost [3].

Core Insights - The growth of the Registered Investment Advisor (RIA) model is attributed more to consumer preference for helpful advice rather than the fiduciary obligation itself [1] - The evolution of technology has enabled RIAs to offer investment advice at a mass scale, contributing to the industry's growth [2] - The current landscape shows a significant increase in RIAs, with 15,870 firms managing $144.6 trillion in assets, compared to 436 companies with $2 billion in assets in 1940 [3] Industry Development - The RIA industry has expanded significantly since the introduction of the Investment Company Act of 1940 and the Investment Advisers Act, which established fiduciary duties [3][24] - The number of RIAs has grown from 436 in 1940 to 15,870 today, with a substantial increase in assets under management from $2 billion to $144.6 trillion [3] - The oldest RIA, Howe & Rusling Wealth Management, has maintained its independent status since its registration in 1941, focusing on retail wealth management [4][22] Regulatory Environment - The debate over the implementation of fiduciary laws continues, with recent developments applying fiduciary duty to more types of investment advice [9][12] - The SEC's Regulation Best Interest, which replaced the suitability standard in 2020, governs brokerages but is less stringent than the fiduciary duty established in the '40 Act [11] - The need for uniform fiduciary rules with tougher consumer protections is emphasized, as current regulations allow for potential conflicts of interest [10][12] Technological Impact - The rise of personal computers and digital brokerages in the 1990s provided RIAs with the necessary technology to manage a larger client base effectively [5][30] - The introduction of custodial platforms by firms like Charles Schwab and Fidelity Investments has facilitated scalable operations for RIAs, leading to significant industry growth [30] Historical Context - The fiduciary principles established in the 1940 laws were a response to the market crash of 1929 and aimed to restore trust in the investment advisory industry [24][28] - The SEC's enforcement of fiduciary duty has been crucial in addressing problematic practices within the industry, ensuring that advisors disclose conflicts of interest [25][29] - The historical context of fiduciary laws reflects a long-standing debate over the balance between regulatory oversight and the freedom of financial advisors [32][34]

Core Viewpoint - The Ademi Firm is investigating Sealed Air for potential breaches of fiduciary duty and other legal violations related to its recent transaction with CD&R, which involves a significant cash payout to shareholders [1][3]. Transaction Details - Sealed Air shareholders will receive $42.15 in cash per share in an all-cash transaction, with an enterprise value of $10.3 billion [2]. - Insiders of Sealed Air are set to receive substantial benefits as part of the change of control arrangements [2]. Board Conduct - The transaction agreement imposes significant penalties on Sealed Air if it accepts competing bids, which may limit the board's ability to consider other offers [3]. - The investigation focuses on whether the Sealed Air board is fulfilling its fiduciary duties to all shareholders amidst these limitations [3].