Citizens State Bank v. Timm, Schmidt & Co. Case Brief

Wisconsin Supreme Court1983Docket #74003
335 N.W.2d 361 113 Wis. 2d 376 1983 Wisc. LEXIS 2913

Complete case briefs with LSD+

Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

3 min read

tl;dr: An accounting firm negligently prepared financial statements. A bank relied on them to make a loan and lost money when the company failed. The court rejected the privity rule, holding accountants can be liable to any foreseeable third party who relies on their work.

Legal Significance: The case rejects both the traditional privity rule (Ultramares) and the Restatement § 552 approach for accountant liability, instead adopting a broad foreseeability standard from general negligence law, limited only by public policy considerations to be determined after trial.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Defendant Timm, Schmidt & Co., an accounting firm, prepared audited financial statements for Clintonville Fire Apparatus, Inc. (CFA) for the years 1973-1976. The financial statements for 1974 and 1975 contained material errors that overstated the company’s value by over $400,000. Plaintiff Citizens State Bank, which was not in privity with Timm, reviewed and relied upon these negligently prepared statements when it extended approximately $380,000 in loans to CFA. The defendant’s president acknowledged knowing that audited statements are commonly supplied to lenders, but the firm’s employees denied specific knowledge that CFA would use these particular reports to obtain loans from Citizens. In 1977, Timm discovered the errors and informed Citizens. Citizens subsequently called its loans, which forced CFA into receivership and liquidation. Citizens was unable to recover over $152,000 of its loans and sued Timm for negligence. The trial court granted summary judgment for Timm, finding no duty of care was owed to a third party not in privity.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: May an accountant be held liable for negligence to a third party not in privity who foreseeably relies on a negligently prepared audit report?

Yes. An accountant may be held liable to a third party not Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

About IRAC analysis

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.

Legal Issue

May an accountant be held liable for negligence to a third party not in privity who foreseeably relies on a negligently prepared audit report?

Conclusion

This decision significantly expands professional liability in Wisconsin by replacing the privity Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex

Legal Rule

An accountant's liability to a third party for negligent misrepresentation is determined Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute iru

Legal Analysis

The Wisconsin Supreme Court departed from the traditional common law rule established Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostr

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • An accountant may be held liable for negligence to a third
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial