ADPI American Dental Partners, Inc. (MM)

The law firm Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on behalf of its client and on behalf of other similarly situated purchasers of American Dental Partners, Inc. (Nasdaq:ADPI; "ADPI" or the "Company") securities between August 10, 2005 through December 13, 2007, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges ADPI and three of its officers and directors with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the �Exchange Act�). It is alleged that defendants omitted or misrepresented material adverse facts about the Company�s financial condition, business prospects, and revenue expectations during the Class Period. ADPI claims to be a leading provider of business services to multidisciplinary dental group practices in selected markets throughout the United States. As of December 31, 2006, ADPI was affiliated with 22 dental group practices, comprising 470 fulltime equivalent dentists practicing in 209 dental facilities in 18 states and its securities were actively traded on the NASDAQ. The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued numerous materially false and misleading statements which caused ADPI�s securities to trade at artificially inflated prices. More specifically, the complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the Company engaged in unlawful conduct towards Park Dental Group ("PDG"); (2) that as a result of this conduct, the Company booked a large portion of earnings and revenue which materially inflated its financial figures; (3) that the Company's financial statements were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; (4) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. Beginning on January 1, 1999, ADPI�s subsidiary, PDHC, Ltd. ("PDHC"), entered into a Service Agreement (the "Service Agreement") with PDG. The Service Agreement was amended January 1, 2001 and again on August 10, 2005. According to the Company's financial statements, the relationship with PDG accounted for approximately 30% of its consolidated net revenues between 2004 and 2006. No other customer of ADPI accounted for more than 10% of the Company's consolidated net revenue. The complaint alleges that on December 12, 2007, investors were shocked to learn that a judgment had been awarded in favor of PDG, against PDHC and ADPI. As the complaint describes, the jury in the case awarded PDG more than $88,290,000 in damages, broken down as follows: $9,413,397 in compensatory damages for breach of the Service Agreement; $11,500,000 for breach of implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing; $200,000 for breach of fiduciary duty; $67,000,000 for tortious interference with contract or prospective advantage; and $177,250 for defamation. The complaint alleges that upon the release of this news, the Company's shares declined $5.36 per share, or 27.21 percent, to close on December 12, 2007 at $14.34 per share, on unusually heavy trading volume. The complaint further alleges that the following day, as the public continued to learn of the December 12, 2007 judgment against ADPI, investors were shocked to learn that due to ADPI's alleged conduct and actions, the jury had also awarded PDG $42,250,000 in punitive damages. On this news, the Company's shares declined $9.72 per share, or 67.78 percent, to close on December 13, 2007 at $4.62 per share, on unusually heavy trading volume. If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than March 31, 2008, request that the Court appoint you as Lead Plaintiff of the class. Any member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as Lead Plaintiff through counsel of their choice or may choose to remain an absent class member. Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. has significant experience in prosecuting investor class actions and actions involving securities fraud. The firm has offices in Washington, D.C., New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, and London, and is active in major litigation pending in federal and state courts throughout the nation. You may visit the firm�s website at www.cmht.com. The firm�s reputation for excellence has been recognized on repeated occasions by courts which have appointed the firm to lead positions in complex multi-district or consolidated litigation. Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. has taken a lead role in numerous important cases on behalf of defrauded investors, and has been responsible for a number of outstanding recoveries which, in the aggregate, total in the billions of dollars. If you have any questions about this notice or the action, or with regard to your rights, please contact either of the following: Steven J. Toll, Esq. Laura Armstrong Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. 1100 New York Avenue, N.W. West Tower, Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20005 Telephone: (888) 240-0775 or (202) 408-4600 Email: stoll@cmht.com or larmstrong@cmht.com