ZIFF DAVIS HOLDINGS INC
CIK 1124566Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Restructuring
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 Jan 2005
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 6
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 3
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
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.
- Kirkland & EllisFirst linked Sep 2002 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,688 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.97× · Went dark 0.17× · 95% wipeout 0.86×
- Gibson Dunn & CrutcherFirst linked May 2005 · Text search only · 1,126 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.23× · Went dark 0.20× · 95% wipeout 0.95×
- Cravath Swaine & MooreFirst linked Sep 2002 · Text search only · 839 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.29× · Went dark 0.03× · 95% wipeout 0.82×
- Latham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Sep 2002 · Text search only · 2,669 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.08×
- Paul HastingsFirst linked Sep 2002 · Text search only · 769 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.72× · 95% wipeout 1.08×
- Shearman & SterlingFirst linked Sep 2002 · Text search only · 2,650 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.21× · Went dark 0.13× · 95% wipeout 0.84×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kirkland & Ellis | Sep 2002 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,688 | 0.97 | 0.17 | 0.86 |
| Gibson Dunn & Crutcher | May 2005 | Text search only | 1,126 | 1.23 | 0.20 | 0.95 |
| Cravath Swaine & Moore | Sep 2002 | Text search only | 839 | 1.29 | 0.03 | 0.82 |
| Latham & Watkins LLP | Sep 2002 | Text search only | 2,669 | 0.98 | 0.31 | 1.08 |
| Paul Hastings | Sep 2002 | Text search only | 769 | 0.98 | 0.72 | 1.08 |
| Shearman & Sterling | Sep 2002 | Text search only | 2,650 | 1.21 | 0.13 | 0.84 |
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.
- Gerald T. NowakKirkland & EllisFirst linked May 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 38 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.83× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.51×
- Dennis M. MyersKirkland & EllisFirst linked Sep 2002 · Named in SEC correspondence · 69 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.05× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.60×
- Michael MillerLatham & Watkins LLPFirst linked Sep 2002 · Text search only · 10 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gerald T. NowakKirkland & Ellis | May 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 38 | 0.83 | 0.00 | 0.51 |
| Dennis M. MyersKirkland & Ellis | Sep 2002 | Named in SEC correspondence | 69 | 1.05 | 0.00 | 0.60 |
| Michael MillerLatham & Watkins LLP | Sep 2002 | Text search only | 10 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |