Legal Opinion

KPMG Peat Marwick v. Asher

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided December 30, 1997No. 29A04-9702-CV-66PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DARDEN, Judge.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

KPMG Peat Marwick appeals the trial court’s summary judgment ruling that Missouri substantive law applies to the plaintiffs’ class action claim against it, and the denial of its motion for summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ claims of negligent accounting and fraud.

We affirm in part and reverse in part.

ISSUES

1. Whether the trial court correctly determined that Missouri law governs this action.

2. Whether the plaintiff farmers could recover on a negligent accounting claim.

3. Whether the plaintiff farmers could recover on a fraud claim.

FACTS

In 1990,…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hubbard Manufacturing Co. v. GreesonIndiana Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Bonhiver v. GraffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  3. Malachowski v. Bank One, IndianapolisIndiana Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Aluma Kraft Manufacturing Co. v. Elmer Fox & Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1973
  5. State Ex Rel. PaineWebber, Inc. v. VoorheesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1995

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. In re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
  2. Ben-Yisrayl v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
  3. In Re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. Tires ProductsDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2001
  4. In the Matter of Bridgestone/firestone, Inc., Tires Products Liability Litigation. Appeals of Bridgestone/firestone, Inc., Bridgestone Corporation, and Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
  5. Conrad v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2001

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API