In Auditor Suit, Second Circuit Says Quantity Does Not Always Mean Quality

by Orrick - Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Group
Contact

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has revived a federal securities class action against Grant Thornton LLP regarding its unqualified 1999 audit opinion indicating that Winstar Communications Inc.’s 1999 financial statements was in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. The Second Circuit’s opinion is notable because it finds that, despite an apparently thorough audit (in terms of hours spent and documents reviewed) a fact finder could still find enough evidence of a conscious disregard of signs of fraud to support an inference of recklessness. In other words, even where an auditor does a significant amount of work on an audit, such work will not necessarily immunize the auditor from securities claims.

Winstar, a broadband communications company whose core business was to provide wireless internet connectivity to various businesses, filed for bankruptcy in April 2001, one month after an investment firm began publicly questioning its accounting practices.

Plaintiffs maintained that Grant Thornton issued an unqualified audit opinion that Winstar’s year-end 1999 financial statements set forth in the company’s SEC Form 10-K were in conformity with GAAP, despite its alleged knowledge of accounting improprieties by Winstar, one of Grant Thornton’s largest clients at the time. At issue were nine allegedly bogus transactions that Winstar entered into at the end of 1999, which enabled Winstar to realize almost $115 million in revenues. These transactions allegedly involved: purported sales of equipment that was never shipped by Winstar; sales of services never rendered; sales of equipment that Lucent Technologies, Winstar’s strategic partner, purchased as a favor to Winstar provided Lucent could “swap out” the equipment later on; and sales to undercapitalized companies that Winstar propped up with equity infusions and reciprocal transactions.

Plaintiffs contended that Grant Thornton was aware of various red flags in connection with these transactions, including the lack of any indication that any such goods or services were ordered and delivered.

The district court granted Grant Thornton’s motion for summary judgment, holding that that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether Grant Thornton had acted intentionally or recklessly in issuing its unqualified audit opinion for fiscal year 1999. In support of its holding, the court placed emphasis on the magnitude of the audit work. Grant Thornton had spent 1,928 hours of professional time, had assembled working papers spanning 3,000 pages, and had reviewed numerous documents, including copies of contracts, Winstar business plans, press releases, board minutes, and memos.

On appeal the Second Circuit reversed, holding that the number of hours spent on an audit cannot, standing alone, immunize an account firm from charges that it has violated the securities laws. According to the court, regardless of the number of hours spent or volume of documents reviewed in the course of the audit, Plaintiffs introduced evidence that Grant Thornton did not scrutinize serious signs of fraud by an important client. The court found that there was at least some evidence that Grant Thornton consciously ignored these red flags relating to various accounting issues, including: suspicious end-of-quarter transactions, round-trip transactions in which revenues were subsequently offset by Winstar’s payments to financially unstable customers under unrelated contractual obligations; the absence of documents confirming the goods or services ordered by Winstar customers, the fact of delivery, or the existence of an underlying agreement; and the repeated failure of Winstar to provide supporting documentation requested by Grant Thornton. Given this evidence, a jury could find that the audit was so deficient that the risk of fraud was either known to Grant Thornton or so obvious that it must have been aware of it.

Plaintiffs alleged that Grant Thornton violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and made false and misleading statements in the audit opinion letter. On July 19, 2012, the Second Circuit vacated the Southern District of New York’s dismissal of the case on summary judgment, holding that a jury reasonably could determine that Grant Thornton’s audit of Winstar’s 1999 financial statements was “so deficient” as to be “highly unreasonable, representing an extreme departure” from the standards of ordinary care in violation of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Orrick - Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Group | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Orrick - Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Group
Contact
more
less

Orrick - Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Group on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.