Valparaiso University Law Review Volume 28 Number 3 Spring 1994 pp.867-918 Spring 1994 Proportionality: A Much-Needed Solution to the Accountants' Legal Liability Crisis Robert Mednick Jeffrey J. Peck Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Robert Mednick and Jeffrey J. Peck, Proportionality: A Much-Needed Solution to the Accountants' Legal Liability Crisis, 28 Val. U. L. Rev. 867 (1994). Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol28/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Valparaiso University Law School at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Valparaiso University Law Review by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at
[email protected]. Mednick and Peck: Proportionality: A Much-Needed Solution to the Accountants' Legal Articles PROPORTIONALITY: A MUCH-NEEDED SOLUTION TO THE ACCOUNTANTS' LEGAL LIABILITY CRISIS* ROBERT MEDNICK" JEFFREY J. PECK- I. INTRODUCTION A fundamental precept of American jurisprudence is the apportionment of liability based on fault, with culpable parties paying their fair share of damages. As logical and fair as that proposition appears, it is increasingly the exception rather than the rule in some areas of litigation, particularly federal securities fraud litigation against certified public accountants. Achieving equitable outcomes by relating the degree of liability to the proportion of damages or settlements paid is nearly impossible in most such cases. By mandating joint and several liability, federal securities laws and some state laws encourage suits against "deep pocket" defendants, such as accounting firms, for the sole purpose of extracting settlements from those parties, regardless of their actual responsibility, if any, for the losses suffered.