GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORP
CIK 40554Its 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 2015
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 10
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 7
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- A filing mentions a Wells noticeForm 10-Q (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- A filing mentions an SEC subpoenaForm 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)
- A filing mentions cooperating with the SECForm 10-K (opens in a new tab)
- A filing mentions a formal order of investigationForm 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.
- Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLPFirst linked Dec 2011 · Named in a filing · 1,051 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.31× · Went dark 0.27× · 95% wipeout 0.91×
- Cahill Gordon & ReindelFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in a filing · 598 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 0.18× · 95% wipeout 0.77×
- Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.First linked Feb 2010 · Named in a filing · 995 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.46× · Went dark 0.37× · 95% wipeout 0.80×
- Sidley AustinFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,210 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.30× · Went dark 0.14× · 95% wipeout 0.93×
- Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLPFirst linked Jan 2009 · Named in a filing · 1,125 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.23× · Went dark 0.20× · 95% wipeout 0.96×
- Jenner & BlockFirst linked Nov 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 122 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.12× · Went dark 0.78× · 95% wipeout 0.94×
- Mayer BrownFirst linked May 2004 · Named in a filing · 680 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.34× · 95% wipeout 0.94×
- Emmet Marvin & MartinFirst linked Feb 2010 · Text search only · 199 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.81× · Went dark 0.16× · 95% wipeout 0.85×
- Simpson Thacher & BartlettFirst linked Feb 2010 · Text search only · 1,396 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.28× · Went dark 0.11× · 95% wipeout 0.92×
- Cleary Gottlieb Steen & HamiltonFirst linked Oct 2002 · Text search only · 741 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.31× · Went dark 0.12× · 95% wipeout 0.76×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP | Dec 2011 | Named in a filing | 1,051 | 1.31 | 0.27 | 0.91 |
| Cahill Gordon & Reindel | Feb 2010 | Named in a filing | 598 | 1.03 | 0.18 | 0.77 |
| Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. | Feb 2010 | Named in a filing | 995 | 1.46 | 0.37 | 0.80 |
| Sidley Austin | Feb 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,210 | 1.30 | 0.14 | 0.93 |
| Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP | Jan 2009 | Named in a filing | 1,125 | 1.23 | 0.20 | 0.96 |
| Jenner & Block | Nov 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 122 | 1.12 | 0.78 | 0.94 |
| Mayer Brown | May 2004 | Named in a filing | 680 | 0.98 | 0.34 | 0.94 |
| Emmet Marvin & Martin | Feb 2010 | Text search only | 199 | 0.81 | 0.16 | 0.85 |
| Simpson Thacher & Bartlett | Feb 2010 | Text search only | 1,396 | 1.28 | 0.11 | 0.92 |
| Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton | Oct 2002 | Text search only | 741 | 1.31 | 0.12 | 0.76 |
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.
- Corey R. ChiversWeil, Gotshal & Manges LLPFirst linked Dec 2011 · Named in a filing · 38 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.63× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.48×
- Robert MandellSidley AustinFirst linked Feb 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 10 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.15× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.58×
- Andrew L. FabensGibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLPFirst linked Jan 2009 · Named in a filing · 85 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.47× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.38×
- Ronald O. MuellerGibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLPFirst linked Jan 2009 · Named in a filing · 41 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.43× · Went dark 1.05× · 95% wipeout 0.59×
- William L. Tolbert Jr.Jenner & BlockFirst linked Nov 2004 · Named in a filing · 15 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.32× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.36×
- Marc L. KlymanMayer BrownFirst linked May 2004 · Named in a filing · 6 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.70× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Bruce C. BennettCovington & BurlingFirst linked Jun 1994 · Named in SEC correspondence · 11 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.92× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.01×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corey R. ChiversWeil, Gotshal & Manges LLP | Dec 2011 | Named in a filing | 38 | 1.63 | 0.00 | 1.48 |
| Robert MandellSidley Austin | Feb 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 10 | 1.15 | 0.00 | 1.58 |
| Andrew L. FabensGibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP | Jan 2009 | Named in a filing | 85 | 1.47 | 0.00 | 1.38 |
| Ronald O. MuellerGibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP | Jan 2009 | Named in a filing | 41 | 1.43 | 1.05 | 0.59 |
| William L. Tolbert Jr.Jenner & Block | Nov 2004 | Named in a filing | 15 | 2.32 | 0.00 | 1.36 |
| Marc L. KlymanMayer Brown | May 2004 | Named in a filing | 6 | 1.70 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Bruce C. BennettCovington & Burling | Jun 1994 | Named in SEC correspondence | 11 | 2.92 | 0.00 | 2.01 |