The Barchris case set precedent in that:
A) The auditor was found guilty of fraud.
B) The auditor is responsible for reporting material differences that arise between the audit report date and the registration statement date.
C) The auditor is responsible for all differences that arise between the audit report date and the registration statement date.
D) All of the above.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Barchris case set a precedent that the auditor is responsible for reporting material differences that arise between the audit report date and the registration statement date. While the auditor may be found guilty of fraud in certain circumstances, this was not the specific precedent set by the Barchris case. The auditor is also not responsible for all differences that arise between the audit report and registration statement dates, only material differences.

The Barchris Case Set Precedent in That