Skip to main content
Midas Edge

How LawyerWatch works

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.

What a row says

We read EDGAR’s daily filings since 1995 and the SEC’s comment letters for the lawyers and firms each company names, and run a full-text search for each name. Each company’s first link to a lawyer or firm starts a clock. A flag counts for that lawyer or firm only if it began after that date, so a firm hired to handle a bankruptcy does not have that bankruptcy counted on its row. A company a person is an officer, director or large owner of is not counted as their client.

“Expected” is what comparable companies show: the same era, the same type (a SPAC, a biotech, a small-business filer) and the same size. A firm serving only microcaps is held to microcaps. A corporate family counts as one client, and clients in trouble on one day count as one event in the test, because one SEC sweep can stop many shells at once.

What it cannot say

  • It reads clients, not conduct. Firms that take on distressed or speculative companies will show more trouble among them, and that says nothing about their work.
  • A text search finds a firm on the other side of a deal as readily as the filer’s own, so not every linked company is a client. Each row shows how many of its companies a filing names.
  • Prices are missing for many small companies, so a wipeout is undercounted among them. Lawyers who changed firms are shown under the firm they appear with most, and their address names that firm, so it can move when newer filings change which firm that is.
  • A release that names a company’s officer, or its stock as what a scheme sold or moved, counts as scrutiny of that company unless the company is mid-sized or larger and only its stock is named. The company may be the victim, and each event links to what to read.

Does a record say anything about the next client?

This test asks it forward. On each date a company was first linked to a lawyer or firm, using only what was known that day, we ranked the lawyer’s or firm’s record against everyone newly linked that year, then watched the company for five years. The rows are the worst 5% of records, against comparable companies linked the same year. A range that spans 1 is not settled. This says how the next client fared, not why, and most clients of even the worst records had none of these.

Lawyers, links a filing names

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny and another red flag1.45×

    Range 1.02 to 1.82. 5.4% against 3.7% at comparable companies, on 915 new links. Clean when linked: 1.73× (1.14 to 2.47).

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny1.26×

    Range 1.01 to 1.53. 10.4% against 8.3% at comparable companies, on 922 new links. Clean when linked: 1.44× (1.01 to 1.82).

  • Two or more different red flags1.21×

    Range 1.01 to 1.40. 15.5% against 12.9% at comparable companies, on 933 new links. Clean when linked: 1.21× (0.96 to 1.45).

  • Shares fell 95% from their high1.08×

    Range 0.96 to 1.22. 20.9% against 19.2% at comparable companies, on 920 new links. Clean when linked: 1.09× (0.94 to 1.24).

  • Stopped filing, and the SEC acted2.41×

    Range 1.81 to 3.11. 5.9% against 2.4% at comparable companies, on 919 new links. Clean when linked: 2.46× (1.60 to 3.23).

Lawyers, with text-search links too

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny and another red flag1.37×

    Range 1.05 to 1.81. 5.2% against 3.8% at comparable companies, on 1,331 new links. Clean when linked: 1.58× (1.09 to 2.06).

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny1.44×

    Range 1.20 to 1.76. 13.2% against 9.1% at comparable companies, on 1,342 new links. Clean when linked: 1.50× (1.13 to 1.92).

  • Two or more different red flags1.18×

    Range 1.01 to 1.35. 14.2% against 12.1% at comparable companies, on 1,327 new links. Clean when linked: 1.29× (1.05 to 1.47).

  • Shares fell 95% from their high1.13×

    Range 1.01 to 1.23. 20.2% against 17.9% at comparable companies, on 1,329 new links. Clean when linked: 1.11× (0.97 to 1.28).

  • Stopped filing, and the SEC acted2.29×

    Range 1.78 to 2.81. 5.6% against 2.4% at comparable companies, on 1,337 new links. Clean when linked: 2.31× (1.74 to 2.94).

Law firms, links a filing names

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny and another red flag1.04×

    Range 0.81 to 1.32. 3.6% against 3.5% at comparable companies, on 1,302 new links. Clean when linked: 1.09× (0.74 to 1.53).

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny1.24×

    Range 1.05 to 1.45. 10.0% against 8.0% at comparable companies, on 1,304 new links. Clean when linked: 1.22× (0.97 to 1.48).

  • Two or more different red flags1.29×

    Range 1.11 to 1.47. 13.6% against 10.5% at comparable companies, on 1,305 new links. Clean when linked: 1.29× (1.10 to 1.50).

  • Shares fell 95% from their high1.17×

    Range 1.05 to 1.30. 16.2% against 13.8% at comparable companies, on 1,313 new links. Clean when linked: 1.11× (0.96 to 1.30).

  • Stopped filing, and the SEC acted1.72×

    Range 1.29 to 2.13. 4.3% against 2.5% at comparable companies, on 1,297 new links. Clean when linked: 1.75× (1.25 to 2.29).

Law firms, with text-search links too

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny and another red flag1.01×

    Range 0.80 to 1.23. 3.4% against 3.4% at comparable companies, on 2,522 new links. Clean when linked: 0.97× (0.75 to 1.27).

  • SEC or DOJ scrutiny1.10×

    Range 0.94 to 1.25. 8.5% against 7.7% at comparable companies, on 2,519 new links. Clean when linked: 1.07× (0.88 to 1.24).

  • Two or more different red flags1.15×

    Range 1.03 to 1.28. 12.6% against 11.0% at comparable companies, on 2,530 new links. Clean when linked: 1.22× (1.08 to 1.35).

  • Shares fell 95% from their high1.03×

    Range 0.92 to 1.14. 14.1% against 13.7% at comparable companies, on 2,529 new links. Clean when linked: 1.08× (0.97 to 1.19).

  • Stopped filing, and the SEC acted1.78×

    Range 1.42 to 2.19. 3.8% against 2.1% at comparable companies, on 2,531 new links. Clean when linked: 1.74× (1.27 to 2.17).

Questions

Is this an accusation?

No. Every number describes what happened to companies, and most of those companies’ troubles have nothing to do with their lawyers. Firms that take on distressed or speculative companies will show more trouble among them, and that says nothing about their work.

What does q mean?

How far chance could explain a row, allowing for how many rows were tested: those with at least one such company, each on that condition. Below 0.05 is the usual bar. It is one way to count, and a stricter one would leave fewer rows, so a row near the bar can move with the method.

Why is a firm I respect near the top?

Large firms serve large companies through large events. The expected count allows for era, type and size, but it cannot allow for why a company chose that firm: a firm known for enforcement defense or restructuring is hired by companies already in difficulty.

How current is it?

It is rebuilt each day from EDGAR’s daily filings, SEC and Justice Department releases, and prices. Each page says when it was last updated.

What if something here is wrong?

Use “Report an error” on any page, with what is wrong and a source that shows it. Names come from filings and a search of their text, so a mistake is possible, and a correction is welcome.

Can I get the data?

Each table on the front page links to itself as JSON, under /api/v1/lawyerwatch, with the same sorting and filters.

Updated Nov 7, 2026, from 7,672 days of EDGAR’s daily filings through Nov 6, 2026: 219,793 links to 33,019 companies.

Report an error on this page