Unformatted text preview: They argued four main facts in relation to due diligence, carelessness and the emphasis on generating revenue from new clients rather than properly budgeting for audits. 2. Coopers, the defendant, demanded that this was a massive fraud perpetrated by Phar-Mor’s management. They illustrated that the fraud was a collusive effort by multiple individuals within the upper management of the company who continually worked to hide evidence form the auditors. Their attorney stated “It’s a first. . that effectively turns outside auditors into insurers against crooked management.”...
View Full Document
- Spring '09
- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Coopers, sue Coopers, Federal Securities Exchange, Pennsylvania common law