What can we help you find? Enter your search above.
What can we help you find? Enter your search above.
Communicating with Sugarman Rogers through this website does not create an attorney-client relationship with the firm or any of our attorneys. Our decision as to whether and on what terms we may agree to represent a client involves consideration of a variety of factors, discussion with the prospective client, and, where appropriate, a written engagement agreement.
Please do not use this form of communication to transmit any private, personally identifying, or other confidential information. We cannot guarantee the confidentiality or security of this means of communication.
October 20, 2024
Sugarman Rogers partner William Boesch and associate Gwen Nolan King have won dismissal of a case against a tax-preparation accountant who became embroiled in a dispute between two brothers over management of a Woburn-based commercial real estate company. One of the brothers charged that the other had mismanaged the company’s money, and sued the tax preparer on the theory that he should have investigated and discovered the wrongdoing. A superior court judge agreed that based on the evidence, the accountant had appropriately relied on the information given for preparation of the tax returns, and was not engaged as an auditor to investigate the company’s finances. The court therefore dismissed all claims against the accountant.
|
|
Victory for tax accountant in family business dispute |
Date: October 20, 2024 |
Case Report |
William L. Boesch |
Related Services: Professional Liability, Business Disputes |
||
|
Sugarman Rogers partner William Boesch and associate Gwen Nolan King have won dismissal of a case against a tax-preparation accountant who became embroiled in a dispute between two brothers over management of a Woburn-based commercial real estate company. One of the brothers charged that the other had mismanaged the company’s money, and sued the tax preparer on the theory that he should have investigated and discovered the wrongdoing. A superior court judge agreed that based on the evidence, the accountant had appropriately relied on the information given for preparation of the tax returns, and was not engaged as an auditor to investigate the company’s finances. The court therefore dismissed all claims against the accountant. |
Related People |
|||
William L. BoeschPartner617.227.3030[email protected] |
|||