Which of the following facts must be proven for a lender to prevail in a state-law negligent misrepresentation action against a CPA who prepared a borrower's tax return that was disclosed to the lender?

Which of the following facts must be proven for a lender to prevail in a state-law negligent misrepresentation action against a CPA who prepared a borrower's tax return that was disclosed to the lender?


The plaintiff justifiably relied on the misrepresentations.

Sun Corp. approved a merger plan with Cord Corp. Factors in approving the merger were the tax returns of Cord prepared by Frank & Co., CPAs. Sun had required Cord to disclose its tax returns and audited financial statements as a condition of the merger. Frank knew of this condition before it prepared returns that contained irregularities that later caused Sun to suffer substantial losses. For Frank to be liable for common law negligence, Sun, at a minimum, must prove that Frank

Sun Corp. approved a merger plan with Cord Corp. Factors in approving the merger were the tax returns of Cord prepared by Frank & Co., CPAs. Sun had required Cord to disclose its tax returns and audited financial statements as a condition of the merger. Frank knew of this condition before it prepared returns that contained irregularities that later caused Sun to suffer substantial losses. For Frank to be liable for common law negligence, Sun, at a minimum, must prove that Frank



Failed to exercise due care.

Plaintiff acquired a security issued under a registration statement that contained a material misstatement of facts. In a suit by Plaintiff under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 against the issuer's auditor,

Plaintiff acquired a security issued under a registration statement that contained a material misstatement of facts. In a suit by Plaintiff under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 against the issuer's auditor,



Plaintiff need not prove intent or causation by the defendant.