Heartland Resources, Inc. - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Decisions

Settlements

Litigation Activity Indices

Top Ten List

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Heartland Resources, Inc. Summary: The class action was filed on behalf of purchasers of securities promoted and sold unlawfully by Heartland Resources, Inc. and the other Defendants, on May 19, 2008.

The complaint alleges that the securities promoted and sold by the Defendants included partnership interests in what were purported to be mainly limited partnerships. The securities promoted and sold by the Defendants also included Working Interests offered by Heartland Resources, Inc. "Working Interests" are fractional, undivided interests in oil and gas properties and rights.

The complaint also alleges that by and through the Partnerships and offerings of Working Interests ("Offerings"), the Defendants facilitated the fraudulent sale of securities to the Investors.

The Investors are pursuing remedies against the Defendants under the Securities Act of 1933 and the regulations promulgated thereunder (the "Securities Act"), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the regulations promulgated thereunder (the "Exchange Act"), the Tennessee Securities Act of 1980 and the regulations, rules, and orders promulgated thereunder (the "Tennessee Securities Act"), and Tennessee common-law and equitable causes of action, the Securities Act of Kentucky and the regulations, rules, and orders promulgated thereunder (the "Kentucky Securities Act"), and Kentucky common-law and equitable causes of action.

In June 19, 2008, the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, Improper Venue and Insufficient Service of Process or, in the alternative, to Transfer Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1404. On June 30, 2008, Middle District of Tennessee Judge Aleta A. Trauger ordered the case transferred to the Western District of Kentucky.

On November 21, 2008, Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. signed the Memorandum Opinion and Order denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss. On November 26, 2008, a defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings and also a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On January 15, 2009, Judge McKinley consolidated several cases, administratively dismissing Civil Action Number 1:08CV-143-M. Civil Action Number 1:08CV-94-M became lead case. On January 26, 2009, the plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint. On February 13, 2009, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint. On March 24, 2009, Judge McKinley issued the Memorandum Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part the pending motion to dismiss. The previous motions to dismiss and for judgment on the pleadings were denied as moot.

On November 12, 2009, the plaintiffs filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Against Heartland Defendants. On February 1, 2010, Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. granted the Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment against the Heartland Defendants. According to the Order, the Court finds no genuine issue for trial, and does hereby grant partial summary judgment as prayed for by Plaintiffs granting them rescission of their investments in the securities sold to them by the Heartland Defendants with respect to their First, Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Causes of Action in their First Amended Complaint.

On March 2, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a motion for entry of judgment. On March 12, 2010, a defendant filed three separate motions for summary judgment. On March 31, 2010, another defendant filed another motion for summary judgment. According to the March 31, 2010, Memorandum Opinion and Order by Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr., accordingly, the plaintiffs' motion for entry of final judgment against the Heartland Defendants, costs, and attorneys fees is granted in part and denied in part. That same day, Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiffs.

On April 6, 2010, a defendant filed a motion for summary judgment against all plaintiffs, which was granted on November 16, 2010. On April 24, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a separate motion for partial summary judgment which was denied on November 16, 2010.

According to an article dated October 21, 2010, a federal judge has awarded nearly $1.2 million to Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis LLP for its work representing investors in a securities suit against Heartland Resources Inc., less than half of the $3.65 million the law firm initially asked for. Judge Joseph McKinley Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky signed off on a memorandum opinion and order on Monday granting Waller Lansden's amended motion.

On December 20, 2010, the defendants filed three separate motions for summary judgment. These motions were granted on June 27, 2011. The Plaintiffs' Motion for Certification of a Legal Issue to the Kentucky Supreme Court was also denied. On July 26, 2011, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the June 27th oorder.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code:
Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Non-Metallic Mining

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Heartland Resources, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:
COMPANY WEBSITE:

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Frederick P. Clayton, et al. v. Heartland Resources, Inc. et al.

COURT: M.D. Tennessee	DOCKET NUMBER: 08-CV-00513
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Aleta A. Trauger
DATE FILED: 05/19/2008	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/26/2004	CLASS PERIOD END: 03/22/2006
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Waller, Lasden, Dortch & Davis LLP Nashville City Center; 511 Union Street, Suite 2700, Nashville, TN, 37219 (voice) 615.244.6380, (fax) 615.244.6804, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 05/19/2008
Order
Type: Court Transfer Order		Date on the document: 06/30/2008
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/08/2008

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

Frederick P. Clayton, et al. v. Heartland Resources, Inc. et al.

COURT: W.D. Kentucky	DOCKET NUMBER: 08-CV-00094
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Joseph H. McKinley, Jr
DATE FILED: 01/26/2009	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/26/2004	CLASS PERIOD END: 03/22/2006
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Waller, Lasden, Dortch & Davis LLP Nashville City Center; 511 Union Street, Suite 2700, Nashville, TN, 37219 (voice) 615.244.6380, (fax) 615.244.6804, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Order Of Administrative Dismissal And Consolidation Of Files
Type: Order		Date on the document: 01/15/2009
First Amended Complaint
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/26/2009
Order
Type: Summary Judgment		Date on the document: 02/01/2010
Judgment
Type: Other		Date on the document: 03/31/2010
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 03/31/2010
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 11/16/2010
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 11/16/2010
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/27/2011
Notice Of Appeal
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 07/26/2011

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Complaint
Case Name and/or Number: Able Fence Co. Profit Sharing Plan, et al v. Heartland Resources, Inc. et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 10/01/2008

WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.

Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top

�