Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 11/05/2013 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: February 01, 2012

According to a press release dated February 1, 2012, the complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and financial results. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose operational problems at the Company’s Lucky Friday silver mine. As a result of defendants’ false statements, Hecla’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $11.34 per share on December 29, 2010.

Due to a series of accidents at the Lucky Friday mine during 2011, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) engaged in a close inspection of the mine. In early December, MSHA issued an accident report accusing Hecla of safety failures that led to the death of a miner in April 2011. Thereafter, on January 5, 2012, MSHA issued a closure order for the Lucky Friday mine for the removal of built-up material in the shaft that had been leaking from a pipe into the shaft for a number of years. On January 11, 2012, the Company announced that the Lucky Friday mine would be closed for up to a year based upon MSHA’s order. As a result of the closure, the Company reduced its estimated silver production for 2012 from more than 9 million ounces to around 7 million ounces. On this news, the Company’s stock dropped $1.23 per share, to close at $4.61 per share on January 11, 2012, a one-day decline of 21%.

According to the complaint, during the Class period, defendants knew but concealed from the investing public the following adverse facts: (a) the Company was not in compliance with safety regulations at its Lucky Friday mine; (b) the Company had allowed sand and concrete material to improperly build up in the mine shaft over a period of years, creating a safety hazard; (c) following the December closure, the Company would be unable to reestablish mining operations at the Lucky Friday mine by February 2012, as the Company had previously represented; (d) the Company improperly accounted for its contingent liabilities in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; and (e) based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company’s operations and its expected silver production.

On April 17, 2012, an Order consolidating cases under case 12-CV-00042 as the lead case.

On July 12, 2012, the Court issued an order on the Motions to Appoint Lead Plaintiffs and Appoint Counsel.

On October 16, 2012, a Consolidated Amended Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws was filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants.

On September 26, 2013, the Court issued an Order granting the Defendant's motion to dismiss with leave to amend.

On November 05, 2013, the Court ordered, adjudged, and decreed that judgment be entered in favor of defendants, and that this case be dismissed in its entirety with prejudice

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Basic Materials
Industry: Gold & Silver
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: HL
Company Market: New York SE
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: D. Idaho
DOCKET #: 12-CV-00042
JUDGE: Hon.B. Lynn Winmill
DATE FILED: 02/01/2012
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/26/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/11/2012
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Gordon Law Offices
    623 West Hays, Gordon Law Offices, ID 83702
    208.345.7100 208.345.7100 ·
  2. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: D. Idaho
DOCKET #: 12-CV-00042
JUDGE: Hon.B. Lynn Winmill
DATE FILED: 10/16/2012
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/26/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 01/11/2012
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Francisco)
    100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Francisco), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
  2. Motley Rice LLC (Mount Pleasant)
    28 Bridgeside Boulevard, Motley Rice LLC (Mount Pleasant), SC 29464
    843.216.9000 843.216.9450 · inquiry@motleyrice.com
  3. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
No Document Title Filing Date