LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

ECL INDUSTRIES INC v PRICE WATERHOUSE Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: EIVP77310, CourtCode: SM, CourtName: NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT, Plaintiff: ECL INDUSTRIES INC, State: NY New York, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>EIVP77310, York, Price Waterhouse, Complaint, Report, Dismissing, County, Sworn, Agreement, Stock, Ecl, Hereto, Care, Cpy-new York, Audit, Balance Sheet, Minnesota, Comm, Cplr, Alleges, Negligent, Therein, Statmmmnts, Conformity, Rep01, Books, Extend, Amounts, Representati, Management, City, Sales Tax Requirements, Support, Failure, Adhere, California Law, Complaint Arose, Facts, Minnesota Office, Cpy-chicago, Accepted Auditing Standards, Competence, Applicant, Respondent, Supreme Court, Tpn Stock , ContentID: 120246887

Case Documents
1   COVER SHEET
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 116911
2 pages
PDF
2 1986-11-21 SHALLERT AFF
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 116913
2 pages
PDF
3 1983-12-09 COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 116910
16 pages
PDF
4 1983-11-11 DEF MEM SUP MTD
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 116912
13 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 4 documents , 33 pages
Price: $ 34.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . COVER SHEET

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
RESPONDENT
    46-3004R~200M-85                                                                               
<


                           COUNTY  CLERK,  NEW  YORK  COUNTY  `:\
        INDEX  NUMBER
               Application              for  INDEX  NUMBER  pursuant  to  Section  80&+  -,: .,
               C.P.L.R.

                                                   FEE  835.00

               Spaces  below  to  be  TYPED  or  PRINTED  by  applicant
                                                                                  l
                                                   TITLE  OF  ACTION  OR  PROCEEDING
               CHECK  ONE
                       I%L,            /E-XWJ~~l~,                    I%,,
                q  Sk%YER

                               TRANSACTION





                               TRANSACTION





  Name  and  address                        of
  Attorney               for  Plaintiff                0  ppaJltE/mL'c                             
  or  Petitioner.                                        TN&--       pkd&z                         
                               Y  2  a  LLYk  i

                         I
  Telephone                No.                         trl,,,      A  ,/  b-Y.                   
                                                                               ?A  ,r*,
  Name  and  address                        of                        46       ~U>U
  Attorney               for  Defendant
  or  Respondent.
  Telephone                No.
  A.  Nature               and  object  of  action  or                         AlF/&,I            
                       c4us/tik
             Nature             of  special  proceeding                                  /n&u&V    
      ra  PL.&-P/FI--


  B.  Application                     for  Index  Number           filed  by:             Plaintiff
SNIPPETS:
  • Spaces below to be TYPED or PRINTED by applicant
  • or Respondent.

  • 2 . SHALLERT AFF

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PRICE WATERHOUSE
    COMPLAINT
    DISMISSING
    DEFENDANT
    COUNTY
    SWORN
    CPLR
    ALLEGES
    NEGLIGENT
    REPORT
    ORDER PURSUANT
    HERETO
    EXHIBIT
    SUMMONS
    ACCOMPANYING MEMORANDUM
    LAW
    PREPARING
    FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
    TICOR PRINT NETWORK
    LIMITED PROCEDURES PRICE
    STATUTE
    MALPRACTICE
    UNAMBIGUOUS DISCLAIMER
    REPRESENTATIONS
    SUFFISHOULD
    FAILS
    COGNIZABLE DAMAGE
    PLAINTIFF
    PURPORTED NEGLIGENCE
    
    SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
    COUNTY OF NEW YORK
    --------------------_________________  x
    ECL INDUSTRIES, INC.,                        ..
                              Plaintiff,               Index No.  27067/86
                                                 *
                 -against-                       .     AFFIDAVIT OF EDWIN
    PRICE WATERHOUSE (a/k/a PRICE                         G. SCHALLERT
    WATERHOUSE  & CO.),                          *.
                              Defendant.
    ----II-------------_l_______l________        X
    STATE OF NEW YORK  ): ss.:
    COUNTY OF NEW YORK)
    
                 EDWIN G. SCHALLERT, being duly sworn, deposes
    and says:
                 1.    I am an attorney admitted to the bar of
    the State of New York and am associated with the firm
    of Debevoise & Plimpton, counsel for defendant Price Waterhouse
    I submit this affidavit in support of the motion by Price
    Waterhouse  for  an order pursuant to CPLR  3014,   3211(a)(5)
    and 3211(a)(7) dismissing the complaint.
                 2.    Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a copy of
    the plaintiff's Summons with Notice which was served on
    defendant on November 21, 1986.         Attached hereto as Exhibit
    2 is a copy of plaintiff's complaint, which was served
    on defendant on December 30, 1986.
    
    
    
                 3.    As explained in the accompanying memoran-
    dum of law, the complaint alleges that Price Waterhouse
    was negligent in preparing a report dated November 11,
    1983 on the financial statements of  Ticor Print Network,
    Inc.     ("TPN")  and a letter dated December 7, 1983 des-
    cribing certain limited procedures Price Waterhouse had
    followed to determine whether there had been any change
    in  TPN's financial status.          With respect to the November
    11, 1983 report, the complaint should be dismissed be-
    cause it is barred by the three-year statute of limita-
    tions applicable to a claim of accountant's malprac-
    tice.    CPLR  2114(6).    With respect to the December 7,
    1983 letter, the complaint should be dismissed because
    the letter contains an unambiguous disclaimer that Price
    Waterhouse makes no representations regarding the suffi-
    ciency of its limited review.           Moreover, the complaint
    should be dismissed because it fails to allege any cog-
    nizable damage to plaintiff resulting from the purported
    negligence.
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
  • I am an attorney admitted to the bar of the State of New York and am associated with the firm
  • Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the plaintiff's Summons with Notice which was
  • is a copy of plaintiff's complaint, which was served on defendant on December 30, 1986.
  • As explained in the accompanying memorandum of law, the complaint alleges that Price
  • 1983 on the financial statements of Ticor Print Network, Inc. and a letter dated December 7,
  • 11, 1983 report, the complaint should be dismissed because it is barred by the three-year
  • CPLR 2114.
  • With respect to the December 7, 1983 letter, the complaint should be dismissed because the
  • Sworn to before me this

  • 3 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    AGREEMENT
    REPORT
    CPY-NEW YORK
    AUDIT
    BALANCE SHEET
    MINNESOTA
    HERETO
    THEREIN
    STATMMMNTS
    CONFORMITY
    REP01
    BOOKS
    EXTEND
    AMOUNTS
    REPRESENTATI
    MANAGEMENT
    CITY
    SALES TAX REQUIREMENTS
    SUPPORT
    FAILURE
    ADHERE
    CALIFORNIA LAW
    COMPLAINT AROSE
    FACTS
    MINNESOTA OFFICE
    CPY-CHICAGO
    ACCEPTED AUDITING STANDARDS
    CARE
    COMPETENCE
    
    ii                                                                                                 
    
    
    
    
           SUP-           OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK
           COUNTY  OF  NEW YORK
           --"""""""--'-"----------------------x
           ECL  INDUSTRIES,                 INC.,
                                                      Plaintiff,                                  
                              -against-                                                            
           PRICE  WATERHOUSE'(a/k/a                              PRICE
           WATERHOUSE  &  CO.)
                                                      Defendant.
    
    
                              Plaintiff               ECL  Industries,               Inc.,        by 
           Oppenheimer               Wolff  &  Donnelly,                    as  and  for  its 
           alleges        as  follows:
                              1.          Plaintiff               ECL  Industries,             Inc.,   
           as  Norlin         Industries,                 Inc.,        is  a  corporation              
           existing         under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  Delaware,                            
           principal          place  of  business                      at  75  Varick          Street, 
           York  10013.
                              2.          Defendant               Price  Waterhouse              
           referred        to  as  ttPW'i),  also  known  as  Price  Waterhouse                        
           a  partnership               with  its  principal                    place  of  business    
           the  City,        County,               and  State  of  New  York,  and  is  engaged  in  th
           public        accounting                business.            At  all  relevant              
           present,        PW  held  and  holds  itself                           out  as  a 
           independent               certified           public            accountants         and 
           possessing          the  skill,               ability,            experience,           and 
           public        accountants                and  auditors.                PW does,  and  at 
           times,        did  business                within          the  State  of  New  York.
                             3.           Ticor  is  a  corporation                        organized   
           under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  California,                                       with
           place  of  business                     in  Los  Angeles,              California.
    
    
    ".                                                                                                 
    
    
    
                       4.         southern          Pacific       Company  (hereinafter                
    to  a8  aSPcn)  is  a  corporation                          organized          and  existing       
    laws  of  the  State  of  Delaware,                          with  its  principal                  
    business         in  San  Francisco,                California.
                       5.         Prior  to  December  9,  1983,  Ticor  owned  all  of
    the  issued  and  outstanding                       stock  of  every  class  of  Ticor  Prin
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • COUNTY OF NEW YORK
  • I statmmmnts in conformity with Section 3.4of the Agreement:I jj At those times, PW also knew
  • i upon the August 31 Financial Statements, including PW's rep01
  • the minute books at December 5, 1983,
  • 1983 (our work did not extend to the
  • with amounts shown in the consolidated
  • payable on the balance sheet in the August 31 Financial
  • I j Contrary to Section 5.18 of the Agreement, the representati
  • I I management of CPY-New York was advised that the City of New
  • :I of sales tax requirements,
  • :I Lithaqraph failed to maintain documents required to support
  • failure to adhere to California law OI
  • complaint arose from these facts.
  • The Minnesota office had
  • Ii in the State of Minnesota.
  • CPY-Chicago never applied for a
  • I; generally accepted auditing standards; and the report and
  • 'I failed and neglected to conduct its audit and to report on tb
  • care and competence PW could have known about the

  • 4 . DEF MEM SUP MTD

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    STOCK
    PRICE WATERHOUSE
    ECL
    COUNTY
    COMM
    PLAINTIFF
    SUPREME COURT
    TPN STOCK
    PURCHASE
    SWORN
    SENATE FINANCE COMM
    TION
    ECL INDUSTRIES
    DIREC-PRICE WATERHOUSE
    ACT
    DUTY
    CARE
    TICOR
    PROSSER
    KEETON
    LAW
    TORTS
    WORTH
    PAID
    SOLD
    COUNSEL
    EDWIN
    SCHALLERT
    
    a
    
    
    a     SUPREME COURT OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW YORK
          COUNTY OF  NEW YORK
    
          ---------------------x
    
                                                                                                       
    a     ECL  INDUSTRIES,  INC.,                                                                      
                                                                                                 
                                                                                            -against-  
          PRICE  WATERHOUSE (a/k/a                                                                
    7     6
          &  co.)                                                                                      
                                                                                                 
          -  -  -  -                                                                                   
                                      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * - d                                
    
    
                                                                                           DEFENDANT'S 
                                                                                                 IN 
                                                                                             MOTION  TO
    
                                                                                           Preliminary 
                                                                             Defendant        Price 
           randum  in  support                                                             of  its 
          CPLR  3014,  3211(a)(5)                                                                and 
          plaint                     of  plaintiff                                            ECL 
           the  action                                                        is  barred  by  the 
          because  the  complaint                                                                fails 
                                                                             The  crux  of  ECL's 
           by  Price  Waterhouse,                                                              dated 
            financial                                                        statements        of 
             ("TPN").                                                        This  action        was 
    
    
    
    a
    
    
    a     mons  with  Notice                 on  November  21,  1986,l                      and 
          untimely           under  the  three-year                      statute         of  limitations
          applicable            to  a  claim            of  accountant's                 malpractice.  
    l     214(6).            ECL  seeks  to  avoid  the  statute                            by 
          a  third         party         delivered          Price  Waterhouse's                    
           "on  or  about"               November  23,  1983.                  The  law  is  settled,
          however,           that  the  date  the  accountant                            performs      
          edly  negligent                 work  --  and  not  the  subsequent                          
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • a SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
  • COUNTY OF NEW YORK
  • of the TPN stock was in fact less than its purchase
  • sworn to March 13, 1987.
  • Senate Finance Comm.
  • ECL,
  • tion in this case that ECL was well aware of its claim
  • County; ECL Industries,
  • Price Waterhouse has read minutes of the Board of Direc-Price Waterhouse was bound to act
  • Ticor and Southern Pacific.
  • W. Prosser & W. Keeton, The Law of Torts 767-68 (5th ed.
  • was worth what he paid for it,
  • the value of stock at the time it was sold to a plaintiff and the value of the stock as it
  • Of Counsel: Mary Jo White
  • Edwin G. Schallert
  •    |