Full Press Release Details
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Litigation Partner Brandon Walker Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In Corcept (CORT) To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options
If you purchased or acquired Corcept common stock between October 31, 2024, and December 30, 2025 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Bragar Eagel & Squire partner Brandon Walker or Melissa Fortunato directly at (212) 355-4648.
Click here to participate in the action.
NEW YORK, Feb. 23, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized stockholder rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated (“Corcept” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ:CORT) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Corcept common stock between October 31, 2024, and December 30, 2025, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). Investors have until April 21, 2026 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.
According to the complaint, one of Corcept’s lead new product candidates is relacorilant, which is being developed for multiple indications, including as a treatment for patients with hypercortisolism (also known as “Cushing’s syndrome”). During the class period, defendants represented that the key clinical trials supporting the use of relacorilant as treatment for patients with hypercortisolism were “powerful support” for the New Drug Application (“NDA”) that Corcept submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for this indication. Defendants also stated that they had communicated with the FDA about this NDA and were confident in submitting the NDA, foreseeing no impediments to approval. Toward the latter part of the class period, Defendants repeatedly told investors that “relacorilant is approaching approval.”
The plaintiff alleges that in truth, the FDA had raised concerns about the adequacy of the clinical evidence supporting the NDA and, as a result there was a known material risk that Corcept’s relacorilant NDA would not be approved.
The complaint continues that on December 31, 2025, Corcept revealed that the FDA had issued a Complete Response Letter (“CRL”) regarding the NDA for relacorilant as a treatment for patients with hypercortisolism. The press release issued by the Company stated that the FDA had “concluded it could not arrive at a favorable benefit-risk assessment for relacorilant without Corcept providing additional evidence of effectiveness.” As a result of this disclosure, the price of Corcept common stock declined from a closing price of $70.20 on December 30, 2025, to a closing price of $34.80 on December 31, 2025, or 50.4%.
If you purchased or otherwise acquired Corcept shares and suffered a loss, are a long-term stockholder, have information, would like to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Brandon Walker or Melissa Fortunato by email at investigations@bespc.com, telephone at (212) 355-4648, or by filling out this contact form. There is no cost or obligation to you.
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, South Carolina, and California. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in securities, derivative, and commercial litigation as well as individuals in consumer protection and data privacy litigation. The firm has a nationwide practice and routinely handles cases in both federal and state courts. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Follow us for updates on LinkedIn and Facebook, and keep up with other news by following Brandon Walker, Esq. on LinkedIn.
Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
Tags
Corcept Therapeutics Inc.
Bragar Eagel & Squire