NEW YORK, Feb. 24, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Lakeland Industries, Inc. (“Lakeland” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: LAKE) and certain officers.   The class action, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and docketed under 26-cv-01501, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired Lakeland securities between December 1, 2023 and December 9, 2025, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants’ violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.

If you are an investor who purchased or otherwise acquired Lakeland securities during the Class Period, you have until April 24, 2026, to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.  A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com.  To discuss this action, contact Danielle Peyton at newaction@pomlaw.com or 646-581-9980 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 7980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased.  
  

[Click here for information about joining the class action]

Lakeland, together with its subsidiaries, manufactures and sells industrial protective clothing and accessories for the industrial and public protective clothing market worldwide.  The Company employs a so-called “small, strategic, and quick” (“SSQ”) mergers and acquisitions (“M&A”) strategy to purportedly drive its growth in revenue and profitability.

At the end of November 2023, Lakeland announced its acquisition of New Zealand-based Pacific Helmets NZ Limited (“Pacific Helmets”), a purported leading designer and manufacturer of helmets for the firefighting, wildland firefighting, and rescue markets.  Defendants touted Pacific Helmets’ purported “premium solutions” and said that the Company’s acquisition of it enhanced Lakeland’s product portfolio.

In February 2024, Lakeland announced its acquisition of the related companies Jolly Scarpe S.p.A. (based in Italy) and Jolly Scarpe Romania S.R.L. (collectively, “Jolly”), a purported leading designer and manufacturer of professional footwear for the firefighting, military, police, and rescue markets.  Defendants touted this acquisition as another significant milestone in Lakeland’s expansion efforts, as well as Jolly’s purported strong brand with a well-established reputation for quality and innovative design and manufacturing.

At all relevant times, Defendants represented that Lakeland would realize significant benefits from the foregoing acquisitions in both the near and long term, while touting the Company’s overall SSQ M&A strategy.  Moreover, following the onset of tariff-related market uncertainties in 2025, Defendants consistently represented that the Company was well positioned to weather tariff-related headwinds while continuing to pursue its SSQ M&A strategy.  Indeed, throughout the Class Period, notwithstanding tariff-related headwinds, Defendants made repeated assurances regarding their visibility into Lakeland’s future performance in upcoming quarters, consistently expressing confidence in their financial guidance issued to investors.

For example, in July 2024, Defendants represented that, for Lakeland’s fiscal year (“FY”) 2025,[1] they expected, inter alia, adjusted EBITDA,[2] excluding any material negative impact from foreign exchange (“FX”), to be in the range of $18 million to $21.5 million, and repeatedly reaffirmed that they expected the Company to achieve adjusted EBITDA of at least $18 million in FY 2025 thereafter.

Similarly, in April 2025, Defendants represented that, for Lakeland’s FY 2026, they expected revenue of $210 to $220 million and adjusted EBITDA, excluding any material negative impact from FX, of $24 to $29 million.  Defendants indicated that, notwithstanding tariff-related uncertainties, they had visibility into Lakeland’s future performance by virtue of various purported positive market signals they observed and their widely touted tariff mitigation measures.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding Lakeland’s business, operations, and prospects.  Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Lakeland was experiencing significant, sustained issues with its Pacific Helmets and Jolly businesses, including, inter alia, shipping-related delays, production issues, and slower than expected rollout of new products; (ii) accordingly, Defendants overstated the anticipated and actual positive impact of these businesses on Lakeland’s financial results, as well as the overall strength and quality of Pacific Helmets’ and Jolly’s respective operations; (iii) Lakeland’s business and financial results were significantly deteriorating because of, inter alia, tariff-related headwinds and timing, certification delays, and material flow issues in its acquired businesses; (iv) accordingly, Defendants overstated the strength of their tariff mitigation measures and SSQ M&A strategy; (v) as a result of all the foregoing issues, Defendants’ financial guidance was unreliable; and (vi) as a result, Defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

The truth began to emerge on September 4, 2024, when, during post-market hours, Lakeland issued a press release reporting its financial results for the second quarter (“Q2”) of its FY 2025.  Among other results, Lakeland reported revenue of $38.51 million for the quarter, missing consensus estimates by $1.39 million.  Defendant James M. Jenkins (“Jenkins”), the Company’s President, Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), and Executive Chairman, revealed “the shortfall was due to shipment timing,” and that, inter alia, Jolly had “substantial fire orders delayed to the late third and early fourth quarter.”

On this news, Lakeland’s stock price fell $1.86 per share, or 7.82%, to close at $21.92 per share on September 5, 2024. 

On April 9, 2025, during post-market hours, Lakeland issued a press release reporting its financial results for its fourth quarter (“Q4”) and FY of 2025.  Among other results, Lakeland reported Q4 GAAP[3] earnings per share (“EPS”) of -$2.42, missing consensus estimates by $2.80, and FY 2025 adjusted EBITDA, excluding FX losses, of only $17.4 million—significantly below Defendants’ repeatedly reiterated guidance of EBITDA of at least $18 million.  Defendant Jenkins blamed these disappointing results on, inter alia, “a large Jolly fire boots order that was initially expected to ship in Q2 of FY25 [that] has now slipped into FY26,” “weakness . . . at Pacific Helmets resulting from production issues and product offering updates[,]” and “slower than expected” “rollout of new products from Pacific Helmets and Jolly Boots[.]”

On this news, Lakeland’s stock price fell $2.63 per share, or 14.33%, to close at $15.72 per share on April 10, 2025.

Then, on June 9, 2025, during post-market hours, Lakeland issued a press release reporting its financial results for the first quarter (“Q1”) of its FY 2026.  Among other results, Lakeland reported Q1 GAAP EPS of -$0.41, missing consensus estimates by $0.60, as well as revenue of $46.74 million, missing consensus estimates by $2.1 million.  Defendant Jenkins blamed these disappointing results on, inter alia, its Pacific Helmets business “resulting from production issues and updates to product offerings[,]” as well as “shipment timing” and “tariff-related delays[.]”  Defendant Roger D. Shannon (“Shannon”), Lakeland’s Chief Financial Officer, attributed the shortfall in adjusted EBITDA in the quarter to, inter alia, “elevated freight costs resulting from tariff-related inventory build, and dilution from acquisitions.”

On this news, Lakeland’s stock price fell $4.29 per share, or 22.16%, to close at $15.07 per share on June 10, 2025.

On September 9, 2025, during post-market hours, Lakeland issued a press release reporting its financial results for Q2 of its FY 2026.  Among other results, Lakeland reported revenue of $52.5 million for the quarter, missing consensus estimates by $2.09 million.  Defendant Jenkins once again blamed these disappointing results on, inter alia, “Pacific Helmets resulting from updates to product offerings and production issues[,]” as well as “continued delays in purchasing decisions due to tariff uncertainty[.]”

On this news, Lakeland’s stock price fell $0.64 per share, or 4.43%, to close at $13.80 per share on September 10, 2025.

Then, on December 9, 2025, during post-market hours, Lakeland issued a press release reporting its financial results for the third quarter (“Q3”) of its FY 2026.  Among other results, Lakeland reported Q3 2026 GAAP EPS of -$1.64, missing consensus estimates by $1.93, and revenue of $47.6 million, missing consensus estimates by $9.05 million, blaming, inter alia, “timing, certification delays, and material flow issues” in its acquired businesses, as well as tariff-related headwinds.  The press release further revealed that Lakeland was withdrawing its previously issued financial guidance for FY 2026 and would not provide financial guidance going forward because the foregoing “challenges have affected our forecasting ability[.]”

The same day, also during post-market hours, Lakeland filed a current report on Form 8-K with the SEC, disclosing that Defendant Shannon’s employment had been terminated.

Following these disclosures, Lakeland’s stock price fell $5.85 per share, or 38.97%, to close at $9.16 per share on December 10, 2025.

Pomerantz LLP, with offices in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, London, Paris, and Tel Aviv, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, Pomerantz pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 85 years later, Pomerantz continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered billions of dollars in damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomlaw.com. 
  
Attorney advertising.  Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. 

CONTACT:
Danielle Peyton
Pomerantz LLP
dpeyton@pomlaw.com
646-581-9980 ext. 7980