Legal Opinion

Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Ernst & Whinney

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1991PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

REID, Chief Justice.

Permission to appeal was granted for the purpose of reviewing accountants’ liability to non-clients for negligence in the preparation of inaccurate audit reports, an issue that has not been considered by this Court.

This case presents an appeal by Bethlehem Steel Corporation (Bethlehem) from the judgment of the Court of Appeals, which reversed a judgment notwithstand ing the verdict (JNOV) entered by the trial court in favor of Ernst & Whinney. Bethlehem, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing steel, sued Ernst & Whin-ney, a national accounting firm, for damages…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Ultramares Corp. v. ToucheNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  2. Biakanja v. IrvingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  3. H. Rosenblum, Inc. v. AdlerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
  4. Raritan River Steel Co. v. Cherry, Bekaert & HollandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  5. Ryan v. KanneSupreme Court of Iowa · 1969

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Robinson v. OmerTennessee Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Bily v. Arthur Young & Co.California Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Tina Marie Hodge v. Chadwick CraigTennessee Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Kristen Cox MORRISON v. Paul ALLEN Et Al.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Barrie v. VP Exterminators, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1993

36 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