Legal Opinion

Murphy v. BDO Seidman, LLP

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 24, 2003No. B154584PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RUBIN, J.

INTRODUCTION

Appellant Michael Murphy and literally scores of others appeal from the trial court’s judgment dismissing their corrected fifth amended complaint for failing to state a cause of action. Although the complaint is long, with numerous allegations, dozens of paragraphs, and more than 100 plaintiffs, the gist of the complaint is the following: Accountants BDO Seidman, LLP, and Logan, Throop & Company intentionally or negligently overstated their client’s assets in financial statements they prepared. Appellants relied on those financial statements when they invested in…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Lazar v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Committee on Children's Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp.California Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Bily v. Arthur Young & Co.California Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Mirkin v. WassermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. OCM Principal Opportunities Fund, L.P. v. CIBC World Markets Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. Lopes v. VieiraDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2008
  3. Public Employees' Retirement System v. Moody's Investors Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  4. Vallejo Sanitation & Flood Control District v. FuldDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2012
  5. In re Barclays Liquidity Cross & High Frequency Trading LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2015

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