Weatherford International Ltd./Switzerland WFT (last ticker on record)
CIK 1453090Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Restatement
- SEC/DOJ scrutiny
- 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
- 3
- Newest began Apr 2014
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 2
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 4
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- A filing mentions cooperating with the SECForm 10-Q (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)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.
- Baker & McKenzieFirst linked Sep 2010 · Named in a filing · 587 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.07× · Went dark 0.72× · 95% wipeout 1.00×
- Andrews Kurth LLPFirst linked Feb 2009 · Named in SEC correspondence · 398 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.27× · Went dark 0.35× · 95% wipeout 1.30×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baker & McKenzie | Sep 2010 | Named in a filing | 587 | 1.07 | 0.72 | 1.00 |
| Andrews Kurth LLP | Feb 2009 | Named in SEC correspondence | 398 | 1.27 | 0.35 | 1.30 |
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.
- William D. Davis IIBaker & McKenzieFirst linked Mar 2014 · Named in a filing · 13 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.13× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.50×
- Jonathan B. NewtonBaker & McKenzieFirst linked May 2011 · Named in a filing · 20 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.66× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.99×
- Melinda BrungerAndrews Kurth LLPFirst linked Jun 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 11 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.62× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.81×
- Robert V. JewellAndrews Kurth LLPFirst linked Jun 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 12 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.53× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.43×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| William D. Davis IIBaker & McKenzie | Mar 2014 | Named in a filing | 13 | 1.13 | 0.00 | 1.50 |
| Jonathan B. NewtonBaker & McKenzie | May 2011 | Named in a filing | 20 | 1.66 | 0.00 | 0.99 |
| Melinda BrungerAndrews Kurth LLP | Jun 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 11 | 2.62 | 0.00 | 1.81 |
| Robert V. JewellAndrews Kurth LLP | Jun 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 12 | 1.53 | 0.00 | 1.43 |