CONCORD, N.H. (AP) – As Tyco International’s former bosses head back to trial in New York on charges they looted the company, the federal court in Concord is sorting through a wave of civil lawsuits from former employees and investors that could swamp the court for years.

Former CEO Dennis Kozlowski and former chief financial officer Mark Swartz are headed to trial Jan. 18 on grand larceny counts alleging they looted $600 million from the company. Their first trial ended in a mistrial in May after a juror received a menacing letter.

In Concord, many lawsuits deal with alleged wrongdoing by executives who ran key Tyco operations in Exeter and other Seacoast communities.

One case, Rosemarie Strumpf v. Neil R. Garvey, et al., was brought on behalf of individuals who lost millions buying stock in TyCom Ltd., a Tyco subsidiary that grew out of a merger between Simplex Wire and Cable in Newington and AT&T Submarine, a cable laying operation based in New Jersey.

A lawyer representing the stockholders, Robert Finkel, told the New Hampshire Sunday News he thinks numerous New Hampshire residents who worked at former Tyco manufacturing installations bought TyCom stock and lost money.

The lawsuit alleges deceptive and false representations by Kozlowski and others caused TyCom investors to lose more than $1 billion.

Jurors in the New York criminal case heard witness after witness describe alleged self-dealing, accounting manipulations and financial sleight of hand by Kozlowski.

Allegations in the civil lawsuits mirror some of the same corporate acts alleged in Kozlowski’s criminal case.

U.S. District Judge Paul Barbadoro is presiding over the mammoth Tyco multi-district litigation, consisting so far of 41 individual lawsuits from several states, all consolidated in New Hampshire.

The securities-fraud lawsuit alleges the initial public offering of TyCom stock was little more than a scam to raise vast amounts of cash so Kozlowski and other executives could pay back tens of millions in unauthorized loans they allegedly borrowed from Tyco.

David Polk, vice president of media relations for Tyco, said the offering was a legitimate transaction, although ill-timed in light of the high-tech stock meltdown.

“It was bad timing; certainly, hindsight tells us that,” Polk said. “To suggest TyCom was offering anything but a legitimate transaction was just way off base.”

The defendants in Strumpf v. Garvey include Kozlowski, Swartz and Neil Garvey of Rye, who was president and chief executive officer of TyCom.

Also named as defendants are three financial services institutions that underwrote TyCom’s July 26, 2000, initial public offering.

The plaintiffs allege a Dec. 14, 2004, filing lays out a series of deliberate deceptions Tyco officials allegedly put forth to make TyCom stock appear to be a rare financial opportunity at a time when the market was glutted with unused fiber-optic overcapacity.

The lawsuit says the ostensible purpose of selling 14 percent of TyCom stock publicly was to finance a TyCom Global Network and lay 250,000 kilometers of new undersea cable.

TGN would own and sell bandwidth capacity, making TyCom not just a manufacturing and servicing company for undersea telecommunications cable. It would be going into competition with its existing customers like Global Crossing and Qwest whose cables were “dark” because there was overcapacity and virtually no demand for bandwidth.

The July 2000 initial public offering of 14 percent of TyCom’s stock raised $2.4 billion.

The lawsuit alleges Kozlowski and Swartz used $95.5 million from the public offering “to satisfy their publicly undisclosed outstanding relocation loans.”

TyCom stock reached a high of $45 but the price dropped to $7.41 within a year after news of the bandwidth oversupply became publicly known, according to the lawsuit.