FOREST CITY ENTERPRISES INC
CIK 38067Its 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
- 7
- 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.
- Sullivan & CromwellFirst linked Sep 2015 · Named in a filing · 1,047 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.40× · Went dark 0.15× · 95% wipeout 0.69×
- Venable LLPFirst linked Sep 2015 · Named in a filing · 506 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.38× · 95% wipeout 0.73×
- Thompson Hine LLPFirst linked Jan 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 208 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.95× · Went dark 0.64× · 95% wipeout 1.09×
- Jones DayFirst linked Mar 1997 · Named in a filing · 686 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.25× · Went dark 0.54× · 95% wipeout 1.12×
- Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.First linked May 2002 · Text search only · 995 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.46× · Went dark 0.37× · 95% wipeout 0.80×
- Baker & HostetlerFirst linked Mar 2002 · Text search only · 231 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.11× · Went dark 1.12× · 95% wipeout 1.35×
- Calfee Halter & GriswoldFirst linked Mar 2002 · Text search only · 70 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.88× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.58×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sullivan & Cromwell | Sep 2015 | Named in a filing | 1,047 | 1.40 | 0.15 | 0.69 |
| Venable LLP | Sep 2015 | Named in a filing | 506 | 0.79 | 0.38 | 0.73 |
| Thompson Hine LLP | Jan 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 208 | 0.95 | 0.64 | 1.09 |
| Jones Day | Mar 1997 | Named in a filing | 686 | 1.25 | 0.54 | 1.12 |
| Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. | May 2002 | Text search only | 995 | 1.46 | 0.37 | 0.80 |
| Baker & Hostetler | Mar 2002 | Text search only | 231 | 1.11 | 1.12 | 1.35 |
| Calfee Halter & Griswold | Mar 2002 | Text search only | 70 | 0.88 | 0.00 | 1.58 |
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.
- Thomas A. AldrichThompson Hine LLPFirst linked Nov 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.86× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Daniel T. YoungThompson Hine LLPFirst linked Jan 2007 · Named in a filing · 7 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- DAVID P. PORTERJones DayFirst linked Mar 1997 · Named in a filing · 19 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.25× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.36×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas A. AldrichThompson Hine LLP | Nov 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 6 | 1.86 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Daniel T. YoungThompson Hine LLP | Jan 2007 | Named in a filing | 7 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| DAVID P. PORTERJones Day | Mar 1997 | Named in a filing | 19 | 1.25 | 0.00 | 0.36 |