Haliey Welch said in December 2024 that she was cooperating with the legal team representing people affected by the HAWK token. The statement came after investors filed a federal lawsuit that did not name her. In November 2025, plaintiffs asked to amend their complaint to add Welch, her manager, and her company. The latest substantiated status in the sources cited here is a March 30, 2026 description by plaintiffs’ counsel that the case was pending; those sources do not establish a later ruling or any finding of wrongdoing.
What did Haliey Welch say about the HAWK lawsuit?
In December 2024, Welch said she was cooperating with the legal team representing people affected by the token. The Atlantic reproduced her statement: “I am fully cooperating with and am committed to assisting the legal team representing the individuals impacted, as well as to help uncover the truth, hold the responsible parties accountable, and resolve this matter.” (The Atlantic)
This was Welch’s public statement, not a court filing or an admission of liability. It followed the filing of the initial complaint, which did not name her.
How did the case develop?
| Date | Case event | What it establishes |
|---|---|---|
| December 4, 2024 | HAWK launched. | The launch preceded the investors’ lawsuit and the allegations about promotion, distribution, and trading. |
| December 19, 2024 | Investors filed an initial complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. It named Alex Larson Schultz, OverHere Limited, Clinton So, and the Tuah the Moon Foundation. | The complaint alleged federal securities-law violations. It did not name Welch, and its claims were allegations, not court findings. (Initial complaint) |
| December 2024 | Welch made her cooperation statement. | She publicly said she would assist the legal team representing affected individuals. (The Atlantic) |
| April 23, 2025 | The court appointed Alexander Escobar lead plaintiff and Wolf Popper and Burwick Law co-lead counsel. | This was a procedural step, not a decision on whether the allegations were true. (Wolf Popper) |
| November 18, 2025 | Plaintiffs asked to amend the complaint to add Welch, her manager Johnnie Forster, and 16 Minutes LLC. | The request and the claims described in reporting were plaintiffs’ allegations, not findings of liability. (Decrypt) |
| March 30, 2026 | Burwick Law described the consolidated class action as pending and listed Welch and other parties in its summary of the amended complaint. | This is a case-status account from plaintiffs’ counsel, not an independent judicial finding. (Burwick Law case page) |
Why was Welch added after she said she would cooperate?
Cooperating with a legal team and being named as a defendant are separate matters. Welch’s December 2024 statement described her willingness to assist the lawyers representing affected people; it did not determine who plaintiffs would later sue. Nearly a year later, plaintiffs sought permission to amend their complaint to add Welch, Forster, and 16 Minutes LLC. Decrypt reported that the proposed claims concerned promotional compensation and token features, but those claims remain allegations unless established in court. (Decrypt)
What did investors allege, and what has a court established?
The initial complaint alleged that HAWK was offered and sold without proper securities registration and that its promotion created expectations of profit. Later reporting described allegations that Welch’s company had agreed to promote the token for compensation and that advertised utilities were not technically available. These descriptions concern claims made by plaintiffs, not proven facts. (Initial complaint; Decrypt)
The sources cited here do not establish a court finding that HAWK was a security, that Welch committed fraud, or that any named defendant is liable. The appointment of a lead plaintiff and co-lead counsel likewise does not decide the merits.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What is the latest substantiated case status?
Burwick Law’s March 30, 2026 case page described the consolidated action as pending. That is the latest substantiated status in the sources cited here, and it reflects plaintiffs’ counsel’s account. These sources do not establish whether the court issued a later order. For a status after March 30, 2026, consult the live federal court docket rather than treating the case-page description as current.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Recommended Free Tools
