Failure to maintain adequate internal controls
Company: Hut 8
The claim, verbatim
Defendants caused Hut 8 to fail to maintain adequate internal controls
Source (primary)
Thompson v. Leverton — Entry #11: ORDER: Accordingly, the Court is inclined to transfer this case to the Southern District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C (RECAP (purchased via PACER), court_filing)
View cached copy (2026-09-27)Live source ↗
Quote: “Defendants 'caused [Hut 8] to fail to maintain adequate internal controls while [certain of the] Defendants engaged in improper insider sales . . . .'”
How we checked this
Checked on September 28, 2026. The cited source supports part of this claim, but not all of it.
The order quotes this as an allegation from the amended complaint. The court makes no finding that internal controls were actually inadequate.
Confirmed in the source:
- The derivative plaintiff alleges that Defendants 'caused [Hut 8] to fail to maintain adequate internal controls while [certain of the] Defendants engaged in improper insider sales.'
We could not confirm this from the cited source:
- That Defendants actually caused Hut 8 to fail to maintain adequate internal controls; the court order only recounts this as the plaintiff's allegation.
That does not mean it is false — only that this source does not establish it, as of the date above. If we find a source that settles it, we will re-check and update this page.
What we did: Read our cached copy of RECAP (purchased via PACER) (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.618845/gov.uscourts.nysd.618845.11.0.pdf) in full (4,687 characters, retrieved September 27, 2026) and checked each assertion in the claim against it.
Additional evidence
confirms Thompson v. Leverton — Entry #11: ORDER: Accordingly, the Court is inclined to transfer this case to the Southern District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C
Quote: “Defendants 'caused [Hut 8] to fail to maintain adequate internal controls while [certain of the] Defendants engaged in improper insider sales . . . .'”