EVERGREEN SOLAR INC ESLR (last ticker on record)
CIK 947397Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- 95% wipeout
- Restatement
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- Restructuring
- Bankruptcy
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
- 4
- Newest began Aug 2011
- Largest fall in its shares
- 99%
- Nov 2000 to Dec 2011
- Law firms
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 9
- 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)
- 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)
- Debt accelerated (Item 2.04)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- 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)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Debt accelerated (Item 2.04)Form 8-K/A (opens in a new tab)
- Debt accelerated (Item 2.04)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Debt accelerated (Item 2.04)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)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
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.
- Bingham McCutchenFirst linked Dec 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 291 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.94× · Went dark 0.38× · 95% wipeout 1.06×
- Goodwin ProcterFirst linked Feb 2008 · Named in a filing · 1,221 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.79× · Went dark 0.31× · 95% wipeout 1.17×
- Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & RosatiFirst linked Oct 2004 · Named in SEC correspondence · 1,468 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.09× · Went dark 0.60× · 95% wipeout 1.42×
- Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLPFirst linked Aug 2000 · Named in a filing · 150 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.08× · Went dark 0.42× · 95% wipeout 1.31×
- Ettore A. SantucciFirst linked Mar 2009 · Text search only · 14 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.63×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bingham McCutchen | Dec 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 291 | 0.94 | 0.38 | 1.06 |
| Goodwin Procter | Feb 2008 | Named in a filing | 1,221 | 0.79 | 0.31 | 1.17 |
| Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati | Oct 2004 | Named in SEC correspondence | 1,468 | 1.09 | 0.60 | 1.42 |
| Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLP | Aug 2000 | Named in a filing | 150 | 1.08 | 0.42 | 1.31 |
| Ettore A. Santucci | Mar 2009 | Text search only | 14 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.63 |
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.
- John A. ForeWilson Sonsini Goodrich & RosatiFirst linked Dec 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 56 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.86× · Went dark 1.00× · 95% wipeout 1.20×
- John R. UtzschneiderBingham McCutchenFirst linked Dec 2010 · Named in SEC correspondence · 18 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.45× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.59×
- Daniel PealeCooley LLPFirst linked Jan 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 9 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.01× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.70×
- Robert D. SanchezWilson Sonsini Goodrich & RosatiFirst linked Jan 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 14 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.70× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.97×
- Adam M. DinowGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Nov 2006 · Named in a filing · 8 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.46× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Robert G. O ConnorWilson Sonsini Goodrich & RosatiFirst linked Oct 2004 · Named in a filing · 7 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.11× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.31×
- Jocelyn M. ArelGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Jul 2004 · Named in a filing · 63 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.45× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.44×
- Lawrence A. GoldTesta, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLPFirst linked Jan 2001 · Named in a filing · 5 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 2.50×
- William J. SchnoorGoodwin ProcterFirst linked Aug 2000 · Named in a filing · 23 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.58× · Went dark 0.00× · 95% wipeout 1.14×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| John A. ForeWilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati | Dec 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 56 | 1.86 | 1.00 | 1.20 |
| John R. UtzschneiderBingham McCutchen | Dec 2010 | Named in SEC correspondence | 18 | 0.45 | 0.00 | 0.59 |
| Daniel PealeCooley LLP | Jan 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 9 | 1.01 | 0.00 | 1.70 |
| Robert D. SanchezWilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati | Jan 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 14 | 0.70 | 0.00 | 0.97 |
| Adam M. DinowGoodwin Procter | Nov 2006 | Named in a filing | 8 | 0.46 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Robert G. O ConnorWilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati | Oct 2004 | Named in a filing | 7 | 1.11 | 0.00 | 1.31 |
| Jocelyn M. ArelGoodwin Procter | Jul 2004 | Named in a filing | 63 | 1.45 | 0.00 | 1.44 |
| Lawrence A. GoldTesta, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLP | Jan 2001 | Named in a filing | 5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.50 |
| William J. SchnoorGoodwin Procter | Aug 2000 | Named in a filing | 23 | 0.58 | 0.00 | 1.14 |