Judge Rules 'Seriously Botched' Audit Is Not Fraud

Despite a public clamor for tighter regulation of auditors, a U.S. Court of Appeals ruled on April 19, 2002 that a "seriously botched" audit that led to a plunge in stock prices is not grounds for a securities fraud lawsuit.

Violations of GAAP

The case sets important precedent as an interpretation of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA), a law passed by Congress in 1995 over President Clinton's veto. Under the court's interpretation of PSLRA, an accounting firm is not liable for fraud unless the auditor was deliberately reckless.

In this case, the allegations were that the accounting firm failed to see the obvious – that according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), millions of dollars in revenue from software sales reflected in a financial statement should not have been recognized. The facts were that several factors caused the company to subsequently restate its financial results. One factor involved the accounting for transactions made on the last day of the year with value added resellers. Another involved compliance with Statement of Position 91-1, under which revenue recognition from software sales is restricted when there is significant uncertainty as to whether the company will ever get paid.

No Deliberate Recklessness

In explaining his decision, the judge said that the complaint sets out a compelling case of negligence, perhaps even gross negligence. But negligence alone does not subject an accounting firm to liability for securities fraud. In this case, the departures from GAAP did not constitute such an extreme departure from reasonable accounting practice that the accounting firm knew or had reason to have known that its conclusions would mislead investors. There was no proof of a strong inference that the auditor acted with an intent to defraud, conscious misconduct, or deliberate recklessness.

The company involved in the lawsuit was Altris Software, Inc., a publicly traded company that develops document management software. The accounting firm was PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). A spokesperson for PwC was not available for comment. The AICPA and Big Five firms (excluding Andersen) have joined together in a lobbying effort to oppose any rollback of the gains won for the accounting profession in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act.

Download the full text of the court's opinion.

-Rosemary Schlank

You may like these other stories...

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) on Tuesday adopted a new auditing standard and amendments in three areas of the audit that could pose an increased risk of material misstatement in company financial...
Read more from Larry Perry here and in the Today’s World of Audits archive.In my last article, I presented an overview of one of the first steps in the preplanning phase of an audit engagement: reviewing prior year...
Read more from Larry Perry here and in the Today’s World of Audits archive.AU-C Section 800, Special Considerations—Audits of Financial Statements Prepared in Accordance with Special Purpose Frameworks (SPFs),...

Already a member? log in here.

Upcoming CPE Webinars

Oct 23Amber Setter will show the value of leadership assessments as tools for individual and organizational leadership development initiatives.
Oct 30Many Excel users have a love-hate relationship with workbook links.
Nov 5Join CPA thought leader and peer reviewer Rob Cameron and learn ways to improve the outcome of your peer reviews while maximizing the value of your engagement workflow.
Nov 12This webcast presents basic principles of revenue recognition, including new ASU 2014-09 for the contract method. Also, CPAs in industries who want a refresher on revenue accounting standards will benefit.