Question
1. By statute, piercing the corporate veil is also an option for a plaintiff when a limited liability company is involved. T/F 2. Which of
1. By statute, piercing the corporate veil is also an option for a plaintiff when a limited liability company is involved. T/F
2. Which of the following would be appropriate for an accountant to use when the accountant has conducted such a limited audit that the accountant does not feel able to offer an opinion as to the accuracy of financial statements?
-Unqualified opinion
-Qualified opinion
-Disclaimer
-Warranty
3. Which of the following must be established in order to hold an accountant liable for fraud?
-
That the accountant acted with specific intent meaning that, while the accountant did not intend fraud, the result of the accountants actions resulted in the client defrauding a third party.
-
That the accountant acted with scienter meaning that the accountant failed to act as a reasonable accountant under the circumstances.
-
That the accountant acted with specific intent meaning that the accountant intended to mislead the client or third parties.
-
That the accountant acted with scienter meaning that the accountant knew of the falsity of a statement; or, when making the statement, he or she recklessly disregarded the truth.
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Step: 1
Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions
See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success
Step: 2
Step: 3
Ace Your Homework with AI
Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance
Get Started