Colorado

  Litigation Lawyer.
HOME ABOUT US FAQ'S RESOURCES CONTACT US FREE CASE REVIEW
February 26, 2010
Litigation-Law
             
 
Selecting an attorney for legal cases is a very important decision. Please enter your information below to receive a Free Consultation from an attorney in your area:
 
Zip Code:   
 

Litigation News

 

Three Partners Agree to Permanent Injunctions, Record Penalties and SEC Suspensions;

On February 22, 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced that all four remaining defendants in an action brought against them and KPMG LLP ("KPMG") by the agency in connection with a $1.2 billion fraudulent earnings manipulation scheme by the Xerox Corporation from 1997 through 2000 have agreed to settle the charges against them. Three partners agreed to permanent injunctions, payment of record civil penalties and suspensions from practice before the Commission with rights to reapply in from one to three years. The fourth partner agreed to be censured by the Commission.

The settlements relate to Xerox's fraudulent scheme that involved various manipulations of accounting for leases of Xerox office equipment. The Commission alleged that the manipulations were necessary for Xerox to meet promises it made to Wall Street that its earnings would continue to grow. The manipulations helped Xerox to "close the gap" between its actual performance and what it promised analysts. KPMG was Xerox's independent auditor each of those years. KPMG issued unqualified audit reports asserting that Xerox's financial statements were consistent with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP") and that KPMG had conducted an audit each year in accordance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards ("GAAS"). The SEC alleged in its complaint against KPMG and five KPMG partners filed in 2003 that these statements were materially false and misleading and aided and abetted Xerox's filing of false financial reports with the Commission. When Xerox retained new auditors in 2002, it restated $6.1 billion in equipment revenues and $1.9 billion in pre-tax earnings for 1997-2000. The complaint alleged that KPMG and its partners knew or should have known about the improper topside adjustments that resulted in $3 billion of the restated revenues and $1.2 billion of the restated earnings.

The defendants whose settlements were announced are Ronald Safran, the KPMG engagement partner on the Xerox audit for 1998 and 1999; Michael Conway, the senior engagement partner on the Xerox audit for 2000; Anthony Dolanski, the engagement partner on the Xerox audit for 1997; and Thomas Yoho, the SEC concurring review partner for KPMG on the Xerox engagement from 1997-2000. Safran, Conway and Dolanski each consented to the entry of final judgments against them by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Yoho agreed to the entry of a Commission order imposing a censure pursuant to Rule 102(e) of the SEC's Rules of Practice. Each defendant entered into his settlement without admitting or denying the SEC's allegations or findings.

The final judgments, which are subject to approval by the Honorable Denise L. Cote, order the engagement partners to pay civil penalties that are the largest penalties ever imposed by the Commission against an individual auditor: Safran and Conway to each pay a civil penalty in the amount of $150,000, and Dolanski to pay a penalty in the amount of $100,000. The final judgments also order that Safran, Conway and Dolanski be permanently enjoined from violating certain provisions of the federal securities laws (Sections 17(a)(2) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933) and from aiding and abetting violations of other securities laws (Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder). Safran, Conway and Dolanski each also consented to the issuance of an SEC Order based on the entry of the injunctions which will suspend them from appearing or practicing before the SEC as accountants. Safran will be suspended with a right to reapply in three years, Conway in two, and Dolanski in one. Read more at  sec.gov

Contact our Colorado Litigation Lawyer Now!

 

 
Did You Know?    
 
 
It unlawful for an employer to discriminate on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.
An amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, known as the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 (PDA), makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. In 2005, EEOC received 4,449 charges of pregnancy-based discrimination. Of those charges, EEOC resolved 4,321 pregnancy discrimination charges and recovered $11.6 million in monetary benefits for charging parties and other aggrieved individuals (not including monetary benefits obtained through litigation).

 


  Newsroom  
 


News about Litigation cases in Colorado and nationwide:

Content Industries and Sharman Networks Settle All Global Litigation
SYDNEY – Sharman Networks Ltd. announced today that an historic turning point has been reached for both technology and content industries...

...

Read more >


Prop. 200 Federal District Court Hearing
Arguments Regarding Proof of Citizenship Requirement on Federal Voter Registration form “I was heartened by today's court proceeding in which the c...
Read more >


Four Current or Former KPMG Partners Settle SEC Litigation Relating To Xerox Audits
Washington, D.C., Feb. 22, 2006 - The Commission today announced that all four remaining defendants in an action brought against them and KPMG...
Read more >


More Litigation News >

 
 

Litigation Terms

 


Today's Terms

Exhibit

Definition:
Any document of object serving as evidence in court is called an exhibit.

Clerk of Court

Definition:
A clerk of court is an officer that works closely with the chief judge and oversees the administration and assists in management of case flow and court records.

Chief judge

Definition:
A chief judge is appointed by seniority and has primary responsibility over the administration of the court and decides cases at the same time.

More Litigation Terms >

 

Litigation Resources

 


Search Litigation resources in our resource center:

More Resources >

 

Litigation Hot Topics

 


Topics Related to Litigation:

  • Individual Disputes
  • Company Disputes
  • Institutional Diputes
  • Government Agency Disputes
  • Financial Litigation
  • Employment Litigation
  • Contract Litigation

More Litigation Topics >

Colorado Litigation-Law Attorney

 
If you live in the following cities and need an Litigation-Law attorney you should contact our Litigation-Law Attorney as soon as possible:

  • Arvada
  • Aurora
  • Boulder
  • Brighton
  • Broomfield
  • Canon City
  • Castle Rock
  • Colorado Springs
  • Commerce City
  • Denver
  • Durango
  • Englewood
  • Evergreen
  • Fort Collins
  • Golden
  • Grand Junction
  • Greeley
  • Lafayette
  • Littleton
  • Longmont
  • Louisville
  • Loveland
  • Montrose
  • Parker
  • Pueblo
  • Westminster
  • Wheat Ridge
s
 


Legal Disclaimers
All attorney listings are a paid attorney advertisement, and do not in any way constitute a referral or endorsement by an approved or authorized lawyer referral service. The information provided on Colorado Litigation Lawyer.com is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information related to legal issues commonly encountered. Your access to and use of this website is subject to additional Terms and Conditions.

Local Professional? Generate new business today
Call 866-227-9356 or contact a sales rep


This site is part of the LawFirms.com Network
©2010 ExpertHub, wholly owned subsidiary of MoxyMedia, Inc.