Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Dronsejko v. Grant Thornton, No. 09-4222

By FindLaw Staff on January 20, 2011 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Securities Fraud Action Against Accounting Firm

In Dronsejko v. Grant Thornton, No. 09-4222, a securities fraud class action against an accounting firm claiming improper revenue recognition that materially overstated a corporation's revenues and earnings, the court affirmed the district court's denial of plaintiffs' Rule 60(b) motion where the complaint failed to give rise to a cogent and compelling inference that defendant's actions constituted an extreme departure from the standards of ordinary care, or that no reasonable accountant would have made the same decisions if confronted with the same facts.


As the court wrote:  "This is a securities class action pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, brought on behalf of class members who purchased iMergent common stock between October 15, 2002 and October 7, 2005. Aplt. App. 47, 60-63, 105-107. The basis of the claim is improper revenue recognition that materially overstated revenues and earnings and, in August 2005, led to a restatement of iMergent's financial statements for fiscal years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Aplt. App. 70, 91, 106."

Related Resources

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard