Trustee of Pacific Steel v. UHY – The firm represented UHY in an action brought in federal court in the Northern District of California alleging that UHY, together with the owners of Pacific Steel Casting Company, breached their fiduciary duty to the company, making a claim for damages of more than $40 million. Following two years of discovery and motion practice, UHY successfully excluded the Trustee’s experts and then won a full dismissal of the claim against them following multiple motions for summary judgment.
Young, Garcia & Quadrozzi provides all manner of litigation and pre-litigation support for sophisticated accounting, consulting and professional service providers. Frequently, these disputes begin with pre-litigation demand letters to the accountants directly, or with subpoenas issued to the accounting firm in litigation involving a current or former accounting client. For decades, the Firm has handled these types of pre-litigation threats, ensuring that both the Firm’s and the accounting client’s interests are protected and acting as liaison with malpractice insurance carriers. While many of these early disputes can be neutralized with firm, aggressive early intervention, when malpractice claims ensue, the Firm has a stellar record zealously advocating these issues and, in the process, securing some of the key precedents in this field of law.
Trustee v. UHY – Defended accounting firm from claims of malpractice and allegations of breach of fiduciary duties owed pursuant to a trust instrument. After first capturing the assets of the trust via a successful motion for preliminary injunction, the Firm demonstrated clearly through discovery that plaintiff and its counsel failed to conduct adequate investigation into the claims alleged and that the entire suit was frivolous under Michigan statute and court rules. Accordingly, the Court dismissed all claims against the accountants and found the suit against them frivolous as a matter of law, awarding the accountants their attorney’s fees and costs incurred to defend against the claims. Case settled immediately thereafter on terms favorable to the accountants
Riley v. Ameritech, et al. – Successfully defended consulting and accounting firm against $180 million malpractice claim brought by Ameritech telecommunications company. Ameritech alleged that it relied on attest services and reports prepared by the accounting firm when it consummated the purchase of a technology company represented by the accountants. After significant motion practice, the Court dismissed the majority of claims asserted by Ameritech, with the Firm securing a precedent-setting summary judgment opinion on the scope of an accountant’s liability to non- clients who allege reliance upon an accountant’s attest services. Riley v. Ameritech Corp., 147 F.Supp.2d 762 (E.D.Mich.2001).
Miller Partnership v. FRC – Partnership brought suit against the accounting firm alleging breach of fiduciary duties and malpractice in connection with a failed investment by the partnership. After first securing dismissal of the majority of claims through motion practice, the Firm proceeded to trial on the remaining claims. Following an eight-day trial, the jury deliberated for a mere 45 minutes, concluding that there was no cause of action against the accountants. Thereafter, the Firm successfully recovered mediation sanctions against the Partnership based on its pursuit of these meritless claims.
Chase Bank v. Grant Thonrton, et al. – The Firm successfully defended an accounting firm against allegations of fraud by Chase Bank and Paine Webber. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft of New York represented Paine Webber, and Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn represented Chase Bank. The Firm succeeded in having the complaints of both Chase and Paine Webber dismissed. Chase Bank appealed to the Michigan Court of Appeals and Supreme Court and the Firm prevailed in both venues. Consequently, all charges in these multi-million-dollar lawsuits against the accounting firm were dismissed.
MCA v. Grant Thornton et. al. – The Firm successfully defended an accounting firm against allegations of accountant malpractice in a series of cases stemming from the audit of MCA Financial Corporation, a mortgage banker. Bodman, Longley represented MCA. The basis of the charges was that the accounting firm had failed to spot MCA’s fraud. The accounting firm responded that MCA’s fraud had been calculated to deceive the accounting firm and, consequently, there could not be and was not any negligence on the part of the accounting firm. The Firm successfully defended the accounting firm in state and federal court on six separate occasions. The success at the trial court level was duplicated in subsequent appellate victories.
Colton v. Major Accounting Firm – A disgruntled real estate investor sued a major accounting firm for malpractice as it related to three review engagements. The plaintiff claimed $12 million as a result of the ultimate collapse of a real estate company in which he held a major interest. After a five-week trial, the jury entered a no cause of action against the plaintiff.