CHITTENDEN CORP CHZ (last ticker on record)
CIK 200138Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
NoneThese 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
- 0
- None on record
- 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
No red flag or SEC or Justice Department event on record.
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.
- Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.First linked May 2002 · Named in a filing · 995 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.46× · Went dark 0.37× · 95% wipeout 0.80×
- Goodwin ProcterFirst linked Apr 1999 · Named in a filing · 1,221 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Piper & Marbury L.L.P.First linked Jan 1996 · Named in a filing · 143 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.05× · Went dark 1.33× · 95% wipeout 0.89×
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLPFirst linked Feb 2007 · Text search only · 2,607 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.15× · Went dark 0.19× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
- Emmet Marvin & MartinFirst linked May 2002 · Text search only · 199 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.81× · Went dark 0.16× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
- Brown & WoodFirst linked May 2002 · Text search only · 299 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.53× · Went dark 0.47× · 95% wipeout 0.58×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. | May 2002 | Named in a filing | 995 | 1.46 | 0.37 | 0.80 |
| Goodwin Procter | Apr 1999 | Named in a filing | 1,221 | 0.79 | 0.31 | 1.17 |
| Piper & Marbury L.L.P. | Jan 1996 | Named in a filing | 143 | 1.05 | 1.33 | 0.89 |
| Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Feb 2007 | Text search only | 2,607 | 1.15 | 0.19 | 0.85 |
| Emmet Marvin & Martin | May 2002 | Text search only | 199 | 0.81 | 0.16 | 0.85 |
| Brown & Wood | May 2002 | Text search only | 299 | 1.53 | 0.47 | 0.58 |
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.
- Lisa R. HaddadGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Feb 2007 · Named in a filing · 22 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.43× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.28×
- William P. MayerGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Apr 1999 · Named in a filing · 16 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.47× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- ANDREW F. VILESGoodwin ProcterFirst linked May 2002 · Text search only · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.86×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lisa R. HaddadGoodwin Procter | Feb 2007 | Named in a filing | 22 | 0.43 | 0.00 | 0.28 |
| William P. MayerGoodwin Procter | Apr 1999 | Named in a filing | 16 | 0.47 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| ANDREW F. VILESGoodwin Procter | May 2002 | Text search only | 6 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.86 |