Landell v. Lybrand
Landell v. Lybrand
Opinion of the Court
Appellees, defendants below, are certified public accountants, and, as such, audited the books and accounts of the Employer’s Indemnity Company for the year 1911. The appellant, plaintiff below, averred in his statement
There were no contractual relations between the plaintiff and defendants, and, if there is any liability from them to him, it' must arise out of some breach of duty, for there is no averment that they made the report with intent to deceive him. The averment in the statement of claim is that the defendants were careless and negligent in making their report; but the plaintiff was a stranger to them and to it, and, as no duty rested upon them to him, they cannot be guilty of any negligence of which he can complain: Schiffer v. Sauer Company et al., 238 Pa. 550. This was the correct view of the court below, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 28 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Negligence^ — Certified public accountants — Absence of contract relation. Trespass for negligence will not lie against a firm of certified public accountants by a person who lias no contractual relation with. them, for a loss caused by such person’s reliance upon a report of the defendants alleged to have been false and untrue, in purchasing the stock of a corporation, upon which they reported, where it appears that the report was shown to him by some one who suggested that he purchase the stock, and there is nothing to show that the accountants made the report with intent to deceive him.