Should the Supreme Court allow shareholders of companies found guilty of fraud to sue third parties such as lawyers and investment banks?

  • I agree, because the lawyers and investment banks are almost always involved, to some degree.

    While I do not think that America should be expanding the group of people that can be sued, when it comes to financial issues and things that can be proven, it should be allowed. Companies and banks often take advantage of consumers and shareholders and, if they have a hand in the fraud, they should be held liable, as well.

    Posted by: StakingDenver57
  • Yes, they should be allowed to sue any and all parties involved.

    When companies are found guilty of fraud, it is extremely difficult for the people affected to recover their money. The Supreme Court should allow shareholders to go after as many people as possible, in order to recoup their losses. Furthermore, these third parties most likely were aware of the fraud that was being committed, and they should also be held responsible.

    Posted by: AverageHoward86
  • I think this is a step in the right direction towards protecting the rights of shareholders.

    If this were to be passed into law, I think we would see a lot less fraud in the corporate world. Lawyers and investments banks have a lot tied to these offenses, and I think they should be answerable to them. This is why I chose to agree with this question.

    Posted by: AboriginalKing28
  • Yes, because the lawyers and banks have a fiduciary duty to know what is going on in the corporations when they structure deals.

    The shareholders rely on the lawyers and bankers to adhere to the law when they act. The shareholders are not in a position to dictate the polices of the banks and law firms, nor are they capable of defending themselves when those policies aren't adhered to.

    Posted by: StunnaRett
  • Yes, because this is America, and everyone has the right to be held accountable.

    I feel that our Constitution gives all of us the right to be held accountable. If we do wrong, and do not abide by the law, resulting in someone getting hurt, either physically or financially, then we should be held accountable. I really do not care in what capacity or what position you hold in this country.

    Posted by: SlipArnal
  • No, I do not agree with the Supreme Court allowing shareholder lawsuits against third parties of people or companies guilty of fraud.

    Unless these third parties were a more active part of the crime, then they really didn't do anything wrong. They were just doing their jobs. However, if they are getting a cut or are aware of what is going on, then yes, they should be in trouble too.

    Posted by: Pyr0Edet
  • Yes, third parties such as bankers and lawyers also have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders if they are taking fees from the company.

    When Enron went bankrupt its auditor Andersen was also held responsible for the fraud. Lawyers, bankers and accountants who have access to the books of a company and accept fees from companies are responsible for any fraud perpetrated while they are retained by the company.

    Posted by: C3cilHehe
  • The shareholders should be able to recover their losses from anyone proved to be culpable in the fraud.

    When companies knowingly commit fraud, other entities are typically involved in that fraud. If they are shown to be either negligent or culpable, shareholders should be able to recover losses from these entities as well as from the company. I am less inclined to permit lawsuits for punitive damages; these numbers are always hard to measure and the system has other ways of punishing those who committed the fraud or colluded in it.

    Posted by: baltute
  • The Supreme Court should allow shareholders of companies found guilty of fraud to sue third parties such as lawyers and investment banks because all persons knowingly committing fraud must be held accountable.

    The Supreme Court should allow shareholders of companies found guilty of fraud to sue third parties such as lawyers and investment banks because all persons knowingly committing fraud must be held accountable. If shareholders are unable to sue lawyers and investment banks, then they won't feel the need to curb their fraudulent activities. If they might get sued, they might think first before defrauding their victims.

    Posted by: JeffP4ri5
  • The Supreme Court should allow victims of fraud to sue third parties, such as lawyers and banks.

    When one takes time to consider how massive these types of fraud are on a national level, then it would be virtually impossible for the lawyers and bankers of these particular firms to deny that they had any advance knowledge about the crime. For this reason, shareholders should be allowed to pursue civil actions against all parties involved. In fact, the initial judgment should be divided evenly amongst all of the defrauders.

    Posted by: IoweAim
  • If the companies are the ones guilty of fraud, they should not be allowed to sue anyone.

    If the companies are fraudulent, why should third parties get sued?. The companies should be the ones getting sued for conducting fraudulent business practices, it's a disgrace.

    Posted by: InquisitiveRobert89
  • I disagree that the Supreme Court should allow shareholders of companies found guilty of fraud to sue third parties, because the third parties have usually done nothing illegal and, therefore, should not be held accountable for what the company did.

    I believe this because the lawyers' job is to keep the company out of legal trouble. However, there are cases in which the lawyer and investment banks were not profiting with the company to commit fraud. There are times, yes, when the lawyers and others had knowledge of the fraud before it is brought to them, and those cases should be dealt with differently. However, we cannot punish the people who did nothing but the job they are paid to do.

    Posted by: RomanticDarwin31
  • No, make the shareholders who are found guilty stand and take responsibility. We shouldn't be wasting the courts time with endless finger pointing.

    Endless law suits are just a way for people to pass responsibility for poor decisions on to someone else. Where does it end? Shareholders found guilty of fraud should not be given the opportunity to pass the buck. Demanding that the guilty take responsibility for their actions sends a clear message to others who would follow in their foot steps that such actions will not be tolerated.

    Posted by: WitchSau

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.