MICROCELL TELECOMMUNICATIONS INC
CIK 1018350Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
NoneThese figures describe clients, not conduct. A lawyer or firm can serve many companies that later had trouble for reasons that have nothing to do with their work, and nothing here says any lawyer or firm did anything wrong.
- Red flags
- 0
- None on record
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 7
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 3
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
No red flag or SEC or Justice Department event on record.
An SEC release can name a company’s officer, or its stock as what a scheme sold or moved, so the company may be the victim. Each link goes to what to read.
Law firms
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- Pillsbury WinthropFirst linked Nov 2003 · Named in a filing · 516 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.13× · Went dark 0.82× · 95% wipeout 1.27×
- Stikeman ElliottFirst linked Nov 2003 · Named in a filing · 225 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.08× · Went dark 0.11× · 95% wipeout 1.06×
- Cravath Swaine & MooreFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 839 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.29× · Went dark 0.03× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
- Davies Ward Phillips & VinebergFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 94 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.35× · Went dark 0.21× · 95% wipeout 1.11×
- Davis Wright Tremaine LLPFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 130 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.97× · Went dark 0.59× · 95% wipeout 1.27×
- Goodmans LLPFirst linked Nov 2003 · Text search only · 72 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 0.32× · 95% wipeout 1.01×
- Heenan BlaikieFirst linked Nov 2003 · Text search only · 29 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.75× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.97×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pillsbury Winthrop | Nov 2003 | Named in a filing | 516 | 1.13 | 0.82 | 1.27 |
| Stikeman Elliott | Nov 2003 | Named in a filing | 225 | 1.08 | 0.11 | 1.06 |
| Cravath Swaine & Moore | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 839 | 1.29 | 0.03 | 0.85 |
| Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 94 | 0.35 | 0.21 | 1.11 |
| Davis Wright Tremaine LLP | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 130 | 0.97 | 0.59 | 1.27 |
| Goodmans LLP | Nov 2003 | Text search only | 72 | 1.03 | 0.32 | 1.01 |
| Heenan Blaikie | Nov 2003 | Text search only | 29 | 0.75 | 0.00 | 0.97 |
Lawyers
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- David P. FalckPillsbury WinthropFirst linked Nov 2003 · Named in a filing · 13 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- John T. GaffneyCravath Swaine & MooreFirst linked Jul 2005 · Text search only · 32 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.47× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.66×
- Raymond Chabot Grant ThorntonFirst linked Nov 2003 · Text search only · 13 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.35× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David P. FalckPillsbury Winthrop | Nov 2003 | Named in a filing | 13 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| John T. GaffneyCravath Swaine & Moore | Jul 2005 | Text search only | 32 | 1.47 | 0.00 | 0.66 |
| Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton | Nov 2003 | Text search only | 13 | 1.35 | 0.00 | 0.00 |