Shani Davis 11/23/16 Fred Stern & Company, Inc. (Ultramares Corporation v. Touche et al.) Fred Stern & Company was a company that imported rubber. The demand for rubber very much needed by many industries in the 1920’s. Because of the large quantities of rubber needed and Stern’s shortage of funds, the company took out a $100,000 loan in March 1924, from a finance company, Ultramares Corporation. Touche, Niven & Company had been Stern’s Company’s independent audit since 1920 and issued an audit report which allowed them to take out a loan in the first place. Touche was aware of Stern’s intention to use these audit reports to retrieve the loan and was not aware who was receiving the audit reports. Fred Stern & Company declared bankruptcy in January 1925. Stern’s accountant who is known as Romberg, covered Stern’s status of being bankrupt from the Touche auditors. In addition, he covered up the company’s financial situation by recording fake accounting entries in their records. Touche was sued by Ultramares, to retrieve the $165,000 that was loaned to Stern. Ultramares claimed that the audit firm had been deceitful and inattentive in auditing Stern’s …show more content…
He posted entries from the client’s journals to its general ledger and when he completed, Stern’s accounts receivables totaled to nearly $644,000. Romberg, Stern’s accountant, recorded fake entries, including debiting receivables and crediting sales for roughly $706,000. Siess, included the $706,000 in the receivables balance without questioning Romberg’s reasons on for the entry. In court, during his testimony, Siess reported that he could not remember whether he reviewed any of the fake invoices for Stern’s sales. The Plaintiff counsel demonstrated that just by looking at one of the invoices, it revealed that they were fake. Lacking a shipping numbers, customer order numbers, and other information that would normally be on an
Approximately 90 percent of the company's revenue was fraudulent, according to prosecutors (Murphy, Kim; Miller, Alan C, 1988). A superseding indictment was won by prosecutors on June
Husky International Electronics, Inc. v. Daniel Lee Ritz, Jr. (2016) NATURE OF THE CASE A debt of $164,000.00 was incurred by Chrysalis Manufacturing Corp. to plaintiff Husky International Electronics, Inc. Daniel Lee Ritz, Jr., the director of Chrysalis and owner of 30% of common stock, transferred all of Chrysalis’ assets to other entities the respondent, Ritz controlled, diminishing the ability to pay the debt. Thus, in 2009 Husky filed suit against Ritz, at which time Ritz to file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
Lahijani & Edelson LLP New York Attorney for Defendant: Saleh AlJurbua UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SALLY SELLER, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, v. BILLY BUYER Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff. 17-cv-1234 NOTICE OF MOTION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, upon the annexed Affidavit of Billy Buyer, and Exhibit (A) annexed hereto, the accompanying Memorandum of Law, and all prior papers and proceedings herein, request that this Court dismiss Plaintiff Breach of contract claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). ---------------------------------- Lahijani & Edelson LLP
The violation of statutory provisions by a landlord can qualify as a proximate cause for injuries to tenants in the case the surrounding environment was insecure and there was clear knowledge of intrusions into the given residential area. Ten Associates v. McCutchen Fla. App., 398 So.2d 860 (Fla.App. Ct. 1981). The landlord was legally obligated to positively respond to the plight of the tenants as their lease agreement put him responsible for any required repairs within the common area. The tenants, including Parker, had made numerous attempts to inform him of increased frequency of intrusion due to a broken deadbolt lock that he was mandated, according to the provisions of the statute, to promptly repair.
On Sunday, March 12, 2017 at approximately 12:07p.m, Client Joseph Dorsey was shot while leaving the Talbert House Spring Grove facility. Mr. Dorsey was leaving the facility at 12:07 on approved movement, after Mr. Dorsey left the facility he headed north on Avon St. where allegedly his assailants were waiting on him and shots were fired. Mr. Dorsey, was injured as a result of being the targeted victim in the incident, and was shot twice. Mr. Dorsey received one wound to the shoulder and one wound in the abdomen area. During the incident Mr. Dorsey, was able to run back into the facility after being shot twice.
Jake Ruksakiati V-220 HW 3 Case one: Graham v. Connor (1989) Case two: Kingsley v. Hendrickson (2015) Graham v. Connor: Facts: Graham is a diabetic and asked one of his friends to take him to a convenience store so he could purchase juice to counteract an insulin reaction he had been experiencing. While in the store Graham noticed that the line to check out was extremely long and decided to leave the store. Graham left the store extremely fast, raising suspicion about his activity to police officer Connor.
Case Name and Citation R v Gudgeon [1995] QCA 506 Court and Judges Queensland Court of Appeal: Fitzgerald P., McPherson J.A., Thomas J. Parties Appellant: Maxwell Gudgeon, Defendant during the trial Counsel during appeal: C.E. Holmes Respondent: The Queen (State) Counsel during appeal: R.V. Hansom Q.C. with him D.C. Boyle Material Facts The appellant, a former New South Wales police officer, was sentenced to imprisonment in New South Wales in 1986 for his involvement in a serious drug offence, and he was in prison there from April 1986 until he was released on parole in January 1991. The present appeal relates to his conviction in the Trial Division on 31 August 1994 of an offence which was stated in the indictment in the following terms:
In the movie, A Civil Action, personal injury lawyer, Jan Schlichtman and his law firm, file a law suit against Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace & Company. The prosecution’s case is based on the premise that these two leather companies contaminated the water supply, in Woburn, Massachusetts. The motion brought before the court requested that the eight plaintiffs be compensated for “negligence, conscious pain and suffering, and wrongful death. ”1 Schlichtman presented medical evidence that illustrated an unusually high incidence of cancer in the small town of Woburn.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is the first stop in an unfair labor practice dispute between an employer and a union. What happens when the NLRB is wrong in their judgment, or one of the parties needs further clarification? The next stop would be an appeals court, and Baltimore Sun Company v. NLRB is an example of this conflict. Case Summary In 1996, the Baltimore Sun Company (Balt.
Summary: On April 18, 1938 Jack Miller and Frank Layton were arrested by police when they attempted to take an unregistered sawed-off double barrel shotgun from Claremore, Oklahoma to Siloam Springs, Arkansas. Transporting a firearm that has a barrel under eighteen inches over state lines is not registered and has no stamped paperwork violates the National Firearms Act of 1934. The NFA was a, "revenue act, levying a $200 transfer tax on all covered firearms"(NYU Law, 61). This was a useful tax during this time because it helped control the gangsters from acquiring machine guns(NYU Law, 61).
Byrne relies on Scott v. Watson, 278 Md. 160 (1976), for the proposition that “a breach of a duty by a defendant will result in his liability in the third party criminal activity context when the breach enhances the likelihood of the particular criminal activity.” (Opposition at p. 9). First, Scott did not even hold that the landlord owed the plaintiff a duty—as that case was a certified question from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Id. at 161-62. Second, Scott applied exclusively to the duties a landlord owes to its tenants.
In the fall of 1993, the audit committee completed their eight-month investigation of the accounting fraud that took place. There was a 600-page report issued and was submitted to the SEC for federal
Stan Sewell is consciously and deliberately manipulating his balance sheet to read a much higher value than it should be. Traditionally, under the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), reporting of assets is based on either the historical value or the fair value (Casabona, & Shoaf, 2007). However, Stan Sewell fixed the value of the franchise based on his perception and his desire to benefit more than the franchise was worth. His intention of fixing this value to $500,000 instead of reporting as $50,000 was to deceive his potential investors and creditors. The intent to falsify the facts on the financial information amounts to serious unethical practices.
Read Case 10-2, Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, on page 243. What theory of liability did Justice Posner use in finding the defendant liable? Judge Posner used the strict product liability theory in finding the defendant liable (Herron, 2011). Under the strict product liability theory, K-Mart (seller) would be held liable for defects in their products even if those defects were not introduced by them; also for failing to discover them during production (Herron, 2011).
The application of the law of tort in the auditing has been shaped by a number of leading cases. The most well known one is the Caparo Industries Plc (Caparo) v Dickman (1990). This case arose in the context of a negligent preparation of accounts for a company. It defines the scope of the assumption of responsibility, and what the limits of liability are. Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman 1990 2 AC 605[1] Fact; Fidelity were audited by the defendants, Touche, Ross& Co which submitted an unqualified audit report.