GOOD SAM ENTERPRISES, LLC
CIK 910560Its 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
- 4
- 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.
- Kaplan Strangis and KaplanFirst linked Mar 2004 · Named in a filing · 24 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Jones DayFirst linked Apr 2011 · Text search only · 686 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.25× · Went dark 0.54× · 95% wipeout 1.12×
- Paul HastingsFirst linked Apr 2011 · Text search only · 768 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.98× · Went dark 0.72× · 95% wipeout 1.09×
- White & CaseFirst linked Apr 2011 · Text search only · 907 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.04× · Went dark 0.33× · 95% wipeout 0.91×
- Cahill Gordon & ReindelFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 598 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.03× · Went dark 0.18× · 95% wipeout 0.77×
- Greenberg TraurigFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 1,223 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.01× · Went dark 1.03× · 95% wipeout 1.10×
- Palmer & DodgeFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 98 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.89× · Went dark 0.75× · 95% wipeout 0.99×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaplan Strangis and Kaplan | Mar 2004 | Named in a filing | 24 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Jones Day | Apr 2011 | Text search only | 686 | 1.25 | 0.54 | 1.12 |
| Paul Hastings | Apr 2011 | Text search only | 768 | 0.98 | 0.72 | 1.09 |
| White & Case | Apr 2011 | Text search only | 907 | 1.04 | 0.33 | 0.91 |
| Cahill Gordon & Reindel | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 598 | 1.03 | 0.18 | 0.77 |
| Greenberg Traurig | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 1,223 | 1.01 | 1.03 | 1.10 |
| Palmer & Dodge | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 98 | 0.89 | 0.75 | 0.99 |
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.
- Bruce J. ParkerKaplan Strangis and KaplanFirst linked Apr 2011 · Text search only · 8 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Catherine A. BartlettKaplan Strangis and KaplanFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 5 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- GEORGE TICKNORPalmer & DodgeFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 9 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.78× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Roger MeltzerCahill Gordon & ReindelFirst linked Mar 2004 · Text search only · 18 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.51× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.95×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bruce J. ParkerKaplan Strangis and Kaplan | Apr 2011 | Text search only | 8 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Catherine A. BartlettKaplan Strangis and Kaplan | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| GEORGE TICKNORPalmer & Dodge | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 9 | 0.78 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Roger MeltzerCahill Gordon & Reindel | Mar 2004 | Text search only | 18 | 0.51 | 0.00 | 0.95 |