A manufacturing company was required by its bank to have its financial statements audited each year. The company wanted to increase its operating line of credit and obtain a long-term loan to purchase new equipment. The company hired a local audit firm and the audit work began. The auditor assigned to the file, James, was impressed with the company's business plan for expansion, and concluded that the company's shares would very likely increase in value over the next 4 years. James also realized that anything other than an unqualified opinion would have a negative impact on the company's ability to secure the financing needed to undertake the expansion.

The company had entered into a great number of futures contracts as a means of hedging its foreign currency risk. As James was not familiar with these types of transactions, he had to rely on the president of the company to explain them to him.

James concluded his field work in June, and while writing his audit report he learned that one of the company's competitors, X-CO Ltd., acquired 1 million of the company's outstanding common shares. The audit firm proceeded with issuing an unqualified report. James arranged for his brother to acquire some of the shares. Within 2 months of the audit report issuance, the company lost $2 million on the futures contracts, and had to declare bankruptcy. X-CO's 1 million shares of the company were now worthless. X-CO sued James on the basis of the unqualified audit opinion and was able to establish in court that the audit had not been conducted according to GAAS.

Would the parties be successful in a legal lawsuit, why?