DAVIDsTEA Inc. DTEA (last ticker on record)
CIK 1627606Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- 95% wipeout
- Restatement
- Bankruptcy
- 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
- 3
- Newest began Jul 2020
- Largest fall in its shares
- 99%
- Jun 2015 to May 2024
- Law firms
- 8
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 3
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)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)
- Shares down 95% from their high
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting 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.
- Fasken MartineauFirst linked Jun 2020 · Named in a filing · 126 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 0.37× · 95% wipeout 0.87×
- Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLPFirst linked Dec 2014 · Named in SEC correspondence · 155 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.19× · Went dark 0.16× · 95% wipeout 0.77×
- Ropes & GrayFirst linked Dec 2014 · Named in SEC correspondence · 914 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.14× · 95% wipeout 0.92×
- Dentons CanadaFirst linked May 2015 · Text search only · 49 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.80× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.45×
- HALE AND DORRFirst linked Dec 2014 · Text search only · 665 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.06× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- Miller ThomsonFirst linked Dec 2014 · Text search only · 49 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 1.02× · 95% wipeout 1.39×
- Stikeman ElliottFirst linked Dec 2014 · Text search only · 225 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.08× · Went dark 0.11× · 95% wipeout 1.06×
- WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked Dec 2014 · Text search only · 662 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.14× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fasken Martineau | Jun 2020 | Named in a filing | 126 | 1.03 | 0.37 | 0.87 |
| Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP | Dec 2014 | Named in SEC correspondence | 155 | 1.19 | 0.16 | 0.77 |
| Ropes & Gray | Dec 2014 | Named in SEC correspondence | 914 | 0.98 | 0.14 | 0.92 |
| Dentons Canada | May 2015 | Text search only | 49 | 0.80 | 0.00 | 1.45 |
| HALE AND DORR | Dec 2014 | Text search only | 665 | 1.06 | 0.33 | 1.26 |
| Miller Thomson | Dec 2014 | Text search only | 49 | 1.03 | 1.02 | 1.39 |
| Stikeman Elliott | Dec 2014 | Text search only | 225 | 1.08 | 0.11 | 1.06 |
| WILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | Dec 2014 | Text search only | 662 | 1.14 | 0.33 | 1.26 |
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.
- Jane D. GoldsteinRopes & GrayFirst linked Dec 2014 · Named in SEC correspondence · 22 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.41× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.56×
- Rachel PhillipsRopes & GrayFirst linked Feb 2018 · Text search only · 23 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.55× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.03×
- Mark G. BordenWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERINGFirst linked Dec 2014 · Text search only · 66 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.51× · Went dark 0.43× · 95% wipeout 1.62×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jane D. GoldsteinRopes & Gray | Dec 2014 | Named in SEC correspondence | 22 | 0.41 | 0.00 | 0.56 |
| Rachel PhillipsRopes & Gray | Feb 2018 | Text search only | 23 | 1.55 | 0.00 | 2.03 |
| Mark G. BordenWILMER, CUTLER & PICKERING | Dec 2014 | Text search only | 66 | 1.51 | 0.43 | 1.62 |