FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W291122578> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W291122578 startingPage "40" @default.
• W291122578 abstract "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY * Deepening insolvency is a relatively new end developing legal theory. Courts have disagreed about whether deepening insolvency is a stand-alone tort claim or simply a basis for seeking damages related to fraud, professional malpractice or another claim. * If an auditor is alleged to have missed an accounting irregularity in an audit or the performance of other services, and eventually the company fails, a claim for deepening insolvency might be asserted. * The core of the deepening insolvency theory is that an insolvent corporation and/or its creditors are harmed when a defendant fraudulently or negligently plays a role in increasing a corporation's debt and exposure to creditors, or in depleting its assets by artificially prolonging the corporation's life. ********** [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] As courts continue to expand theories for holding auditors liable to clients and third parties--particularly in connection with business failures---the concept of deepening insolvency is gaining prominence. This article focuses on the issues raised by this emerging claim and on its ramifications for auditors. Courts have disagreed about whether deepening insolvency is a standalone tort claim or simply a basis for seeking damages related to fraud, professional malpractice or another claim. Indeed, there is some question about whether deepening insolvency should be a viable basis of recovery at all. One thing is clear--deepening insolvency generally creates increased risk of exposure to legal action for audit professionals, particularly related to troubled businesses. In some cases, the theory may create additional scrutiny of the auditor's consideration, required by Statement on Auditing Standards no. 59, of an entity's ability to continue as a going concern. In an ordinary negligence or fraud case, damages are limited to actual losses that the plaintiff suffers, often measured in lost profits, a decrease in asset values or in creased costs. The deepening insolvency theory seeks recovery for the expansion of corporate debt and the prolonged life of the corporation. But there have been few cases that recognize deepening insolvency as a cause of action rather than as a damages theory. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Insolvency is generally understood, from a balance sheet perspective, as a financial condition such that the sum of the entity's debts is greater than the fair value of a company's assets. What deepening insolvency cases have also focused on, however, is cash flow insolvency--when a company incurs debt that would be beyond its ability to pay in future years--and low capital insolvency--when a company engages in a transaction or business that its capital base cannot support. The phrase deepening insolvency appears to have had its origins in the mid-1980s in litigation concerning failed businesses. The AICPA has followed this controversial theory as it has been presented to various courts. In the case of Crowley v. Chait, (No. 06-2209) pending in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, the AICPA filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The case involves an appeal by PricewaterhouseCoopers following a trial in New Jersey federal court relating to claims made against the audit firm after the insolvency of Ambassador Insurance Co. The insurer's Vermont regulator asserted negligence claims on grounds that if the outside auditor had conducted a proper audit, the regulator would have learned that Ambassador was near insolvency and would have placed the company into receivership 20 months sooner. The AICPA argued against application of deepening insolvency damages on a claim for professional negligence. THE COURTS' VIEWS Recent court decisions demonstrate a lack of consistency in application and acceptance of this theory. For example, there is a debate whether deepening insolvency is a standalone claim or just another theory of damages for a negligence or fraud claim. …" @default.
• W291122578 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W291122578 creator A5034623282 @default.
• W291122578 date "2008-02-01" @default.
• W291122578 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W291122578 title "Deepening Insolvency: An Emerging Threat? Legal Theory's Development Raises Liability Risks for Auditors" @default.
• W291122578 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W291122578 type Work @default.
• W291122578 sameAs 291122578 @default.
• W291122578 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W291122578 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W291122578 hasAuthorship W291122578A5034623282 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C120527767 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C159091798 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C199521495 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C200635333 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C2777381055 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C2777823127 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C2778348171 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C41282006 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C4163816 @default.
• W291122578 hasConcept C504631918 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C10138342 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C120527767 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C121955636 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C144133560 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C159091798 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C162324750 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C17744445 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C190253527 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C199521495 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C199539241 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C200635333 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C2777381055 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C2777823127 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C2777834853 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C2778348171 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C41282006 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C4163816 @default.
• W291122578 hasConceptScore W291122578C504631918 @default.
• W291122578 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W291122578 hasLocation W2911225781 @default.
• W291122578 hasOpenAccess W291122578 @default.
• W291122578 hasPrimaryLocation W2911225781 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W1575110567 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W1601793907 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W1607315499 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W1607756632 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W204213824 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W2079663752 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W2270936761 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W241246349 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W2585955554 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W2943926450 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W3008843817 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W3037959191 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W3048668045 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W3122396992 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W3124703729 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W3125016926 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W3201306903 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W327863378 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W575684447 @default.
• W291122578 hasRelatedWork W1910502076 @default.
• W291122578 hasVolume "205" @default.
• W291122578 isParatext "false" @default.
• W291122578 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W291122578 magId "291122578" @default.
• W291122578 workType "article" @default.