AUDITING RMU
11th Edition
ISBN: 9781260934830
Author: MESSIER
Publisher: MCGRAW-HILL HIGHER EDUCATION
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 20, Problem 20.26P
To determine
Introduction: The ordinary negligence is a simple mistake and carelessness but gross negligence is a serious issue. Gross negligence refers to not paying attention to the material facts even after knowing about the existence of immateriality in the financial statements. Gross negligence can be termed as a deliberate action whereas ordinary negligence is accidental.
To explain: The bank is likely to prevail on the causes of action that has been raised or not.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Mark Williams, CPA, was engaged by Jackson Financial Development Company to audit the financial statements of Apex Construction Company, a small closely held corporation. Williams was told when he was engaged that Jackson Financial needed reliable financial statements that would be used to determine whether to purchase a substantial amount of Apex Construction’s convertible debentures at the price asked by the estate of one of Apex’s former directors.
Williams performed his audit in a negligent manner. As a result of his negligence, he failed to discover substantial defalcations by Carl Brown, the Apex controller. Jackson Financial purchased the debentures, but it would not have done so if the defalcations had been discovered. After discovery of the fraud, Jackson Financial promptly sold them for the highest price offered in the market at a $70,000 loss.
If Apex Construction also sues Williams for negligence, what are the probable legal defenses Williams’s attorney would raise?…
Mark Williams, CPA, was engaged by Jackson Financial Development Company to audit the financial statements of Apex Construction Company, a small closely held corporation. Williams was told when he was engaged that Jackson Financial needed reliable financial statements that would be used to determine whether to purchase a substantial amount of Apex Construction’s convertible debentures at the price asked by the estate of one of Apex’s former directors.
Williams performed his audit in a negligent manner. As a result of his negligence, he failed to discover substantial defalcations by Carl Brown, the Apex controller. Jackson Financial purchased the debentures, but it would not have done so if the defalcations had been discovered. After discovery of the fraud, Jackson Financial promptly sold them for the highest price offered in the market at a $70,000 loss.
What liability does Williams have to Jackson Financial? Explain
Fleming and Company CPAs, issued an unqualified opinion the 20x3 financial statements of Walton Corporation Late in 20X4, Walton determined that its
controller had embezzled over $2,000,000. Fleming was unaware of the embezzlement. Walton has decided to sue Fleming to recover the $2,000,000. The
suit is based upon Fleming's failure to discover the missing money while performing the audit. Which of the following is Fleming's best defense?
Multiple Choice
The controller was Walton's agent and as such had designed the controls which facilitated the embezzlement
Fleming had no knowledge of the embezzlement.
That the audit was performed in accordance with GAAS
The financial statements were presented in conformity with GAAP.
Chapter 20 Solutions
AUDITING RMU
Ch. 20 - Prob. 20.1RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.2RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.3RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.4RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.5RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.6RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.7RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.8RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.9RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.10RQ
Ch. 20 - Prob. 20.11RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.12RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.13RQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.14MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.15MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.16MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.17MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.18MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.19MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.20MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.21MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.22MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.23MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.24MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.25MCQCh. 20 - Prob. 20.26PCh. 20 - Prob. 20.27PCh. 20 - Prob. 20.28PCh. 20 - Prob. 20.29P
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Sawyer and Sawyer, CPAs, audited the financial statements of Rattler Corporation that were included in Rattler’s Form 10-K, which was filed with the SEC. Subsequently, Rattler Corporation went bankrupt and the stockholders of the corporation brought a class-action lawsuit against management, Sawyer and Sawyer, and the corporation’s board of directors and attorneys for misstatements of the financial statements. Assume that the jury in the case decides that responsibility for $5 million in losses should be allocated as follows: Management 70% Board of directors 20 Auditors 5 Attorneys 5 100% Under what securities act would the stockholders initiate this lawsuit? Assuming that all the defendants in the case are financially able to pay their share of the losses, calculate the amount of losses that would be allocated to Sawyer and Sawyer. Assuming that management had no financial resources, describe how Sawyer and Sawyer’s share of the losses might be increased.arrow_forwardGordon & Moore, CPAs, were the auditors of Fox & Company, a brokerage firm. Gordon & Moore examined and reported on the financial statements of Fox, which were filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Several of Fox’s customers were swindled by a fraudulent scheme perpetrated by two key officers of the company. The facts establish that Gordon & Moore were negligent, but not reckless or grossly negligent, in the conduct of the audit, and neither participated in the fraudulent scheme nor knew of its existence. The customers are suing Gordon & Moore under the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for aiding and abetting the fraudulent scheme of the officers. The customers’ suit for fraud is predicated exclusively on the negligence of the auditors in failing to conduct a proper audit, thereby failing to discover the fraudulent scheme. What is the probable outcome of the lawsuit? Explain. What other…arrow_forwardGordon & Moore, CPAS, were the auditors of Fox & Company, a brokerage firm. Gordon & Moore examined and reported on the financial statements of Fox, which were filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Several of Fox's customers were swindled by a fraudulent scheme perpetrated by two key officers of the company. The facts establish that Gordon & Moore were negligent, but not reckless or grossly negligent, in the conduct of the audit, and neither participated in the fraudulent scheme nor knew of Its existence. The customers are suing Gordon & Moore under the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for alding and abetting the fraudulent scheme of the officers. The customers' sult for fraud is predicated exclusively on the negligence of the auditors in falling to conduct a proper audit, thereby failing to discover the fraudulent scheme. Required: Answer the following, setting forth reasons for any conclusions stated. a. What is…arrow_forward
- Kay & Lee LLP was retained as the auditor for Holligan Industries to audit the financial statements required by prospective banks as a prerequisite to extending a loan to the client. The auditor knows whichever bank lends money to the client is likely to rely on the audited statements. After the audit report is issued, the bank that ultimately made the loan discovers that the audit client’s inventory and accounts receivable were overstated. The client subsequently went bankrupt and defaulted on the loan. The bank alleged that the auditor failed to communicate about the inadequacy of the client’s internal recordkeeping and inventory control. Moreover, the bank claims that the auditors were grossly negligent in not discovering the overvaluation of inventory and accounts receivable. The auditors asserted that there was no way for them to know that the client included in the inventory account $1 million of merchandise in transit to a customer on December 31, 2015. The shipping terms…arrow_forwardKay & Lee LLP was retained as the auditor for Holligan Industries to audit the financial statements required by prospective banks as a prerequisite to extending a loan to the client. The auditor knows whichever bank lends money to the client is likely to rely on the audited statements. After the audit report is issued, the bank that ultimately made the loan discovers that the audit client’s inventory and accounts receivable were overstated. The client subsequently went bankrupt and defaulted on the loan. The bank alleged that the auditor failed to communicate about the inadequacy of the client’s internal recordkeeping and inventory control. Moreover, the bank claims that the auditors were grossly negligent in not discovering the overvaluation of inventory and accounts receivable. The auditors asserted that there was no way for them to know that the client included in the inventory account $1 million of merchandise in transit to a customer on December 31, 2015. The shipping terms…arrow_forwardKay & Lee LLP was retained as the auditor for Holligan Industries to audit the financial statements required by prospective banks as a prerequisite to extending a loan to the client. The auditor knows whichever bank lends money to the client is likely to rely on the audited statements. After the audit report is issued, the bank that ultimately made the loan discovers that the audit client’s inventory and accounts receivable were overstated. The client subsequently went bankrupt and defaulted on the loan. The bank alleged that the auditor failed to communicate about the inadequacy of the client’s internal recordkeeping and inventory control. Moreover, the bank claims that the auditors were grossly negligent in not discovering the overvaluation of inventory and accounts receivable. The auditors asserted that there was no way for them to know that the client included in the inventory account $1 million of merchandise in transit to a customer on December 31, 2015. The shipping terms…arrow_forward
- Nixon & Co., CPAs, issued an unmodified opinion on the 2015 financial statements of Madison Corp. These financial statements were included in Madison’s annual report and Form 10-K filed with the SEC. Nixon did not detect material misstatements in the financial statements as a result of negligence in the performance of the audit. Based upon the financial statements, Harry Corp. purchased stock in Madison. Shortly thereafter, Madison became insolvent, causing the price of the stock to decline drastically. Harry has commenced legal action against Nixon for damages based upon Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. What would be Nixon’s best defense to such an action? Explain.arrow_forwardDryden, a certified public accountant, audited the books of Elixir, Inc., and certified incorrect financial statements in a form that was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Shortly thereafter, Elixer, Inc., went bankrupt. Investigation into the bankruptcy disclosed that through an intricate and clever embezzlement scheme Kraft, the president of Elixir, had siphoned off substantial sums of money that now support Kraft in a luxurious lifestyle in South America. Investors who purchased shares of Elixir have brought suit against Dryden under Rule 10b-5. At trial, Dryden produces evidence demonstrating that his failure to discover the embezzlement resulted merely from negligence on his part and that he had no knowledge of the fraudulent conduct. Is Dryden liable under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934? Why?arrow_forwardFor each separate case, state whether the action or situation shows a violation of the AICPACode of Professional Conduct; if so, explain why and cite the relevant rule or interpretation.a. Your client, Contrary Corporation, is very upset over the fact that your audit last yearfailed to detect an $800,000 inventory overstatement caused by employee theft and falsification of the records. The board discussed the matter and authorized its attorneys toexplore the possibility of a lawsuit for damages.b. Contrary Corporation filed a lawsuit alleging negligent audit work, seeking $1 million indamages.c. In response to the lawsuit by Contrary, you decided to bring litigation against certain officers of the company alleging management fraud and deceit. You are asking for a damagejudgment of $500,000.d. The Allright Insurance Company paid Contrary Corporation $700,000 under a fidelitybond covering an inventory theft by employees. Allright is suing your public accountingfirm for damages on the…arrow_forward
- Your answer is partially correct. As an auditor for the CPA firm of Hinkson and Calvert, you encounter the following situations in auditing different clients. 1. Windsor, Inc. is a closely held corporation whose stock is not publicly traded. On December 5, the corporation acquired land by issuing 3,000 shares of its $20 par value common stock. The owners' asking price for the land was $126,000, and the fair value of the land was $115,500. 2. Sheridan Company is a publicly held corporation whose common stock is traded on the securities markets. On June 1, it acquired land by issuing 20,000 shares of its $10 par value stock. At the time of the exchange, the land was advertised for sale at $268,500. The stock was selling at $11 per share. Prepare the journal entries for each of the situations above. (Credit account titles are automatically indented when amount is entered. Do not indent manually. If no entry is required, select "No Entry" for the account titles and enter O for the…arrow_forwardAs the auditor for Company A, you discover that a material sale ($500,000 sale; cost of goods of $300,000) was made to a customer this year. Because of poor internal accounting controls, the sale was never recorded. Your client makes a management decision not to bill the customer because such a long time has passed since the shipment was made. You determine, to the best of your ability, that the sale was not fraudulent. Using the framework for ethical decision making, determine whether the auditor should require either a recording or a disclosure of the sales transaction. Instructions: Using the framework for ethical decision making, determine whether the auditor should require either a recording or a disclosure of the sales transaction. Please make sure to use at least 100 words in your response. Once you give your response, please respond to at least two of your peers using at least 50 words in your responses. Remember to follow the netiquette guidelines found in the course…arrow_forwardWhat type of auditor report would be issued in each of the following cases? Justify your choice. Bowles Company is engaged in a hazardous trade and cannot obtain insurance coverage from any source. A material portion of the company’s assets could be destroyed by a serious accident. Drave Company owns substantial properties that have appreciated significantly in value since the date purchase. The properties were appraised and are reported in the balance sheet at the appraised values with full disclosure. The CIAs believe that the appraised values reported in the balance sheet reasonably estimate the assets current values. The CIA firm is auditing the financial statement that are to be included in the annual report to the stockholder of Eagle Company, A regulated company Eagle’s Financial Statement are prepared as prescribed by a regulatory agency of the Pakistan Government and some items are not presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The amounts…arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Business Its Legal Ethical & Global EnvironmentAccountingISBN:9781305224414Author:JENNINGSPublisher:Cengage
Business Its Legal Ethical & Global Environment
Accounting
ISBN:9781305224414
Author:JENNINGS
Publisher:Cengage