CIFC Corp. CIFC (last ticker on record)

CIK 1313918Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)

SEC/DOJ scrutiny
Delisting notice (not a red flag)

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 Jun 2010
Largest fall in its shares: —; None of 95% on record
Law firms: 14; Linked to 5 or more companies
Lawyers: 8; Linked to 5 or more companies

What happened

Jan 5, 2016Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Feb 2, 2011SEC administrative proceedingSEC order (opens in a new tab)
Feb 2, 2011SEC enforcement releaseSEC release (opens in a new tab)
Feb 2, 2011An SEC release names it, an officer or its stockSEC release (opens in a new tab)
Jun 8, 2010A filing mentions a Wells noticeForm 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Dec 7, 2009Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Nov 25, 2009Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Apr 21, 2009Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Nov 25, 2008Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Oct 2, 2008Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Jun 23, 2008Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
Feb 29, 2008A filing mentions a formal order of investigationForm 10-K (opens in a new tab)
Jan 16, 2008A filing mentions an SEC subpoenaForm 8-K/A (opens in a new tab)
Aug 15, 2006Delisting notice (Item 3.01)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.

Law firms linked to this company
Name	First linked	How it is known	Linked companies	SEC/DOJ scrutiny	Went dark	95% wipeout
Dechert LLP	Apr 2016	Named in SEC correspondence	434	0.84	0.41	0.96
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett	Nov 2015	Named in a filing	1,396	1.28	0.11	0.92
Hogan Lovells US LLP	Feb 2011	Named in a filing	487	0.96	0.26	0.85
Goodwin Procter	Feb 2011	Named in SEC correspondence	1,221	0.79	0.31	1.17
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP	May 2007	Named in SEC correspondence	1,051	1.31	0.27	0.91
Winston & Strawn	Dec 2006	Named in a filing	585	1.18	0.60	1.02
Hunton & Williams	Apr 2005	Named in SEC correspondence	404	1.06	0.36	0.65
Venable LLP	Apr 2005	Named in a filing	506	0.79	0.38	0.73
Allen & Overy	Jun 2016	Text search only	244	1.00	0.36	0.66
Maples and Calder	Apr 2016	Text search only	1,144	0.95	0.26	0.92
Shearman & Sterling	Apr 2016	Text search only	2,649	1.21	0.13	0.87
Gardner Carton & Douglas	Apr 2005	Text search only	46	1.68	0.00	0.90
Kirkland & Ellis	Apr 2005	Text search only	1,686	0.98	0.17	0.87
WolfBlock LLP	Apr 2005	Text search only	84	0.84	1.36	1.04

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.

Lawyers linked to this company
Name	First linked	How it is known	Linked companies	SEC/DOJ scrutiny	Went dark	95% wipeout
Richard A. GoldbergDechert LLP	Apr 2016	Named in SEC correspondence	18	1.34	1.20	1.00
John M. MutkoskiGoodwin Procter	Aug 2014	Named in SEC correspondence	26	0.39	0.00	1.25
Corey R. ChiversWeil, Gotshal & Manges LLP	Mar 2011	Named in SEC correspondence	38	1.63	0.00	1.48
Ronald J. LiebermanHunton & Williams	Jun 2007	Named in SEC correspondence	9	2.00	0.00	0.00
SIMEON GOLDWeil, Gotshal & Manges LLP	May 2007	Named in SEC correspondence	10	2.95	0.00	0.00
Daniel M. LeBeyHunton & Williams	Apr 2005	Named in SEC correspondence	31	1.48	0.96	0.64
David C. WrightHunton & Williams	Jun 2007	Text search only	29	0.65	0.00	0.24
John Kennedy	Nov 2005	Text search only	38	1.20	0.65	1.23