Originally Posted by
dgcpaphd
Thank you very much for your comments in connection with UA's possible strategy with respect to the class action.
With respect to the wording I cited regarding the litigation note, I am aware that it is a requirement for such a disclosure on audited financial statements.
However, the wording in the disclosure varied, ever so slightly, to imply (weakly) that even if UA lost the litigation defense, the impact on the company would not be material. That type of notice is typical.
It was the way the note was worded that caused me to notice that it did not quite conform to the typical note for similar financial statements.
I am also aware that outside auditors (CPAs) spend a great deal of time working with a client (UA) in jointly writing and composing disclosure notes.
The standard wording of UA's note altered to a point that I feel that UA is not optimistic in connection with the eventual outcome of the case.
-
I think you are reading more into it than is there.
Even if UA loses this, the financial aspect is less than trivial. Perhaps there is another pending or threatened lawsuit with far more substantial damages at issue?
And, yes, a breach of contract case is an "in the normal course of business" lawsuit. This is not a breach of fiduciary duty case against a director.