Legal Opinion
Painters of Philadelphia District Counsel No. 21 Welfare Fund v. Price Waterhouse
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided November 14, 1988No. Civ. A. 88-3559PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HANNUM, Senior District Judge.
Background
The plaintiffs in the above-captioned action are an employee welfare fund and its trustees. (“Plaintiffs” or “the Fund.”) The defendant is an international accounting firm which served as auditor for the Fund from 1976 to 1982. (“Price Water-house”). 1 See Complaint, paragraph 14.
Plaintiffs in their Complaint allege that the Fund’s former administrators negli gently managed the Fund and grossly overcharged the Fund for administrative services.
Plaintiffs also allege that Price Water-house failed to perform the audits consistently with…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Painters Of Philadelphia District Council No. 21 Welfare Fund v. Price WaterhouseCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Dole v. ComptonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1990
- Anoka Orthopaedic Associates, P.A. v. MutschlerDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1989
- Pension Plan of Public Service Co. v. KPMG Peat MarwickDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1993
- Painters of Philadelphia District Council No. 21 Welfare Fund v. Price WaterhouseCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989