Swartz

Swartz v. Kpmg, LLP

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 12, 200705-35167California5,659 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

This suit arises out of a failed tax shelter, which defendants allegedly sold to plaintiff-appellant Theodore Swartz, charg- ing over a million dollars, even though they knew the scheme would be considered unlawful by the IRS. Among the named defendants were accounting firm KPMG, law firm Sidley Austin Brown & Wood (“B&W”), Deutsche Bank AG and Deutsche Bank Securities (collectively “DB” or “Deutsche Bank”), and Presidio Advisory Services (“Presidio”). Against all defendants, Swartz asserted claims (1) under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1964, (2) under the Washington Consumer Protec- tion Act (“WCPA”), Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86.010 et seq., (3) for common-law fraud, and (4) for civil conspiracy. Swartz also sought a judicial declaration of defendants’ liability for interest and penalties that might have arisen during an IRS audit, incomplete at the time he filed his lawsuit. Swartz advanced separate claims against KPMG and B&W for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and professional malpractice. In a published order,1 the district court dismissed all causes of action against Presidio and DB concluding…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.