Enron-v- Andersen

2 Pages 512 Words

1. The possible stockholders in this situation are the stockholders, the FDA, the Law firms, all of the accountant firm’s ea. The Big Five & Enron, the waste management services. The parties that are involved directly would be Enron, the stockholders, the Law offices, the Enron workers, George W. Bush (Arthur Anderson was a big help in getting him elected into office), and the Wall Street Journal.
2. Gross Misconduct-Behavior not conforming to prevailing standard or laws.
Negligence-Dishonest or Bad management by persons entrusted or engaged to act on another’s behalf.
Arthur Andersen is guilty of Gross Misconduct because they did not adhere to the laws established by GAAP.
Their rights to be an auditing firm can be taken away, and then they can also be taken to court on not adhering to the laws established.
3. It should be illegal to work for a firm that is your client, the example are the
workers working for Enron were accountants for Andersen. They risks and potential dangers that can result from allowing this to happen can be that they can merge documents to make fake ones or even the code of conduct can be messed with.
4. The implication that can arise from shredding documents is that a person that has
shredded the documents can be tried for not providing original documents that the
company had in their possession, but now does not. The company Enron was an open trading company so Andersen took away the rights to public view from their shareholders.
5. Full Disclosure- the vendor should be given reasonable chance to provide a patch or new version before the vulnerability details were made public.
Yes, They are since the users are paying the right to stock they should be given the chance to know what is going on.
6. Yes Arthur Andersen did since they shredded the documents they took away from the sight of the information. The documents that they shredded might have been the answer that w...