CAMINUS CORP CAMZ (last ticker on record)
CIK 1095157Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- 95% wipeout
These 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
- 1
- Newest began Jul 2002
- Largest fall in its shares
- 96%
- Oct 2000 to Oct 2002
- Law firms
- 4
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 6
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- Shares down 95% from their high
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.
- Goodwin ProcterFirst linked Feb 2002 · Named in a filing · 1,221 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Irell & ManellaFirst linked Feb 2002 · Named in a filing · 76 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.73× · Went dark 1.09× · 95% wipeout 1.23×
- HALE AND DORRFirst linked Oct 1999 · Named in a filing · 665 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.06× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLPFirst linked Mar 2002 · Text search only · 150 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.08× · Went dark 0.42× · 95% wipeout 1.31×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goodwin Procter | Feb 2002 | Named in a filing | 1,221 | 0.79 | 0.31 | 1.17 |
| Irell & Manella | Feb 2002 | Named in a filing | 76 | 1.73 | 1.09 | 1.23 |
| HALE AND DORR | Oct 1999 | Named in a filing | 665 | 1.06 | 0.33 | 1.26 |
| Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLP | Mar 2002 | Text search only | 150 | 1.08 | 0.42 | 1.31 |
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.
- Anthony T. IlerIrell & ManellaFirst linked Feb 2002 · Named in a filing · 9 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.26× · Went dark 2.41× · 95% wipeout 2.30×
- James R. BurkeWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked Oct 1999 · Named in a filing · 20 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.99× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.86×
- John A. BurgessHALE AND DORRFirst linked Oct 1999 · Named in a filing · 31 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.99× · Went dark 0.80× · 95% wipeout 0.80×
- Lawrence S. WittenbergGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Mar 2002 · Text search only · 19 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.44× · Went dark 0.95× · 95% wipeout 1.56×
- ANDREW F. VILESGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Feb 2002 · Text search only · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.86×
- David F. DietzGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Feb 2002 · Text search only · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.69× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.73×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthony T. IlerIrell & Manella | Feb 2002 | Named in a filing | 9 | 2.26 | 2.41 | 2.30 |
| James R. BurkeWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | Oct 1999 | Named in a filing | 20 | 0.99 | 0.00 | 0.86 |
| John A. BurgessHALE AND DORR | Oct 1999 | Named in a filing | 31 | 0.99 | 0.80 | 0.80 |
| Lawrence S. WittenbergGoodwin Procter | Mar 2002 | Text search only | 19 | 1.44 | 0.95 | 1.56 |
| ANDREW F. VILESGoodwin Procter | Feb 2002 | Text search only | 6 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.86 |
| David F. DietzGoodwin Procter | Feb 2002 | Text search only | 6 | 1.69 | 0.00 | 1.73 |