Water, sewer, garbage electricity and 1 parking space included. An Illinois Supreme Court case may help change the long-standing interpretation of the 1971 case, 1136 Tenants' Corp. v. Max Rothenberg & Co. Decided April 17, 1968. Thomas W. Hill, Jr., William T. Reynolds and William Waterman, Jr., for appellant. Chairman: Jack Kempner, Ph.D. The only specific factor coming to defendants' attention was that Riker's statements showed defendants' own bills to have been paid when in fact they had not been, and that certain tax bills were not in defendants' files. Defendant was not free to consider these and other suspicious circumstances as being of no significance and prepare its financial reports as if same did not exist. Citation. Previous question Next question Get more help from Chegg. True or False ? The questions of fact presented in this case were ably discussed in the decision of the court below and there is no reason why we should interfere with the result reached by that court. One of defendant's senior partners admitted at the trial that defendant performed services for plaintiff which went beyond the scope of a "write-up" and that it actually performed some auditing procedures for plaintiff. Chesarek, Dawn Atchison, "Basis for evaluating the consequences of the 1136 Tenants case" (1975). 2d 120 (2d Dept. Utilization of the simplest audit procedures would have revealed Riker's defalcations. The 1136 Tenants v. Max Rothenberg and Company case (Chapter 5) established the need for an Engagement Letter at the start of an audit. Respondent shall recover of appellant $50 costs and disbursements. ... 1136 TENANTS'CORP. See Answer Add To cart Related Questions. Using the following letters, identify the case to which each statement is most closely related Smith v London Assurance Corp State Street Trust v Emst 1136 Tenants Corp v Max Rothenberg & Co Ultramares Corp. v Touche 2 Ernst& Ernst v Hochfelder Credit Alliance v Arthur Andersen Escott v BarChris Construction Corp 5 6 7 Match each of the options above to the itens below Established a three point … Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. Once you create your profile, you will be able to: Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work. It is defendants' contention that this is what it was hired to do. Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion. Corporation A Corporation is a legal form of business that is separate from its owner. Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Defendant's work sheets indicate that defendant did examine plaintiff's bank statement, invoices and bills and, in fact, one of the work sheets is entitled "Missing Invoices 1/1/63-12/31/63". By Dawn Atchison Chesarek, Published on 01/01/75. Plaintiff's loss resulted from the fact that Riker (the head of Riker Company) appropriated certain of the collections to his own use and also failed to pay plaintiff's bills. In the 1136 Tenants' Corporation case, the client contended that the auditors had been retained to perform all necessary accounting and auditing services. The result of 1136 Tenants' was that accountants might limit liability to client through the use of engagement letters. (4) Letters for underwriters. One of the changes in auditing procedure which was brought about as a result of the 1136 Tenants Corp. case was that auditors were encouraged to begin using: A) Engagement letters. Plaintiff contends that even if an audit were not contracted for defendants performed negligently. Add to this the paltry fee for the work and the responsibility that would be involved if an audit were contracted for. He did testify at the trial that he engaged them to make audits. Plaintiff contends that even if an audit were not contracted for defendants performed negligently. True or False ? Court of Appeals of the State of New York. The trial court in 1136 Tenants’ Corp. ruled that a CPA firm was negligent in its duties when it used “inadequate, incomplete, and improperly deployed” procedures when providing its services. Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Keating, Breitel and Jasen. Plaintiff has recovered a judgment amounting, with interest, to $237,278.83 for failure to perform services which were compensated for at the rate of $600 per annum. Moreover, the proof unequivocally shows that the statements issued by all the accountants hired by Riker (defendants and those that preceded them in the job) bore legends to the effect that they were unverified and no independent examination had been made. 1136 Tenants' Corporation, Respondent, v. Max Rothenberg & Company, Appellant. A | B| C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z. Plaintiff is a corporation owning a co-operative apartment house. Owner’s business name is 1136 Tenants Corp. Jim Miller was associated with the company at the time. 1971. The landlord-tenant relationship is defined by existence of a leasehold estate. (3) An audit resulting in a disclaimer of opinion. Moreover, the proof unequivocally shows that the statements issued by all the accountants hired by Riker (defendants and those that preceded them in the job) bore legends to the effect that they were unverified and no independent examination had been made. SDCI may require a property owner to sign a certification of his or her intent to discontinue the use of the ADU. The 1136 Tenants case was a criminal case concerning a CPA's failure to uncover fraud during a financial statement audit. That sheet alone indicates invoices missing from the records of Riker & Co. which totaled more than $44,000. DIRECTIVES TO INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS PERFORMING WRITE‐UP WORK‐1136 TENANTS' CORPORATION v. MAX ROTHENBERG & COMPANY, 30 N.Y. 2d 585. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Neither of these facts involved a breach of defendants' obligation. 2004), where the court said that “[i]t is now settled that the condominium form of ownership is manifested as a division of a single parcel of The 1136 Tenants case was important chiefly because of its emphasis on the legal liability of the CPA when associated with unaudited financial statements. Objective: To identify socioeconomic risk factors for first presentation advanced glaucomatous visual field loss. This home was built in 2005 and last sold on 3/28/2013 for $365,280. It rendered monthly statements to plaintiff purportedly showing the income and disbursements. The importance of engagement letters under SSARS is highlighted after that. Search for more papers by this author. 1136 TENANTS' CORP. v. MAX ROTHENBERG CO Court of Appeals of the State of New York. During the period in question plaintiff's building and all operations in connection with it were managed by Riker Company, a firm of managing agents which managed several buildings. Respondent shall recover of appellant $50 costs and disbursements. The verdict was against the weight of the evidence. If a CPA recklessly departs from the standards of due care when conducting an audit, the CPA will be liable to third parties who are unknown to the CPA based on gross negligence. This was argued primarily from observations that could have been made had an audit been made. 1136 TENANTS' CORP. v. MAX ROTHENBERG & CO. Email | Print | Comments (0) View Case; Citing Case ; Citing Cases . The floor size is 756 sqft. v. Max Rothenberg & Co. This is potent evidence of what the agreement was ( Pease Elliman v. Weissman, 4 A.D.2d 936). unit project. 2.99. It was constructed in 1942. The CPAs argued that they had been retained to do "write-up" work only, consisting of maintaining accounting … The client is aggressive and the accounting staff is too thin. See Susskind v. 1136 Tenant Corp., 251 N.Y.S. Where a technical system is developed on the basis of the requirements set out in point 2.5.5, the principle of mutual recognition is applicable in accordance with Article 15(5). This is directly contrary to evidence he gave on an earlier trial and in a deposition. In my opinion, the proof was overwhelming that the hiring was as defendants claim. Argued April 2, 1968. Civ. Of course, whether or not defendants are liable depends on the contract of hiring ( State St. Trust Co. v. Ernst, 278 N.Y. 104). Expert's Answer. Opinion for 1136 TENANTS'CORP. 4–17 In the 1136 Tenants' Corporationcase, the client contended that the auditors had been retained to perform all necessary accounting and auditing services. Court of Appeals of the State of New York. Related Questions. Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature. Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. (RCW 59.18.200) Lease Termination in cases of domestic violence: Termination of Lease: A tenant is allowed to terminate a lease with proof of Domestic Violence status, however, the request to terminate must happen within 90 days from the incident date. See the estimate, review home details, and search for homes nearby. In the 1136 Tenants’ Corporation case, what was the essential difference in the way the client and the CPAs viewed the work to be done in the engagement? The company was found negligent in doing “write up” work. The CPAs argued that they had been retained to do "write-up" work only, consisting of maintaining accounting … But to require one in the relationship of defendants to take action would expand the obligation from bookkeeping to criminal detection. (64.) Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case. Auditing 8 Months Ago 30 Views. Receive free daily summaries of new opinions from the New York Court of Appeals. View more property details, sales history and Zestimate data on Zillow. 1136 Case Ct, Miamisburg, OH 45342 is a 1 bed, 1 bath home. Respondent shall recover of appellant $50 costs and disbursements. Auditing Research Monograph 4, The Market for Compilation, Review and Audit Services, published in 1981, while not mentioning the case, attributed the development of the guide to the inconsistencies observed in practice and perceptions of user demands, which may be traceable, in part, to the publicity 1136 Tenants’ Corp. received. In my opinion, the proof was overwhelming that the hiring was as defendants claim. But even this it failed to do. 891315476014 is the parcel number. The 1136 Tenants v. Max Rothenberg and Company case (Chapter 5) established the need for an… 1 answer below » The 1136 Tenants v. Max Rothenberg and Company case (Chapter 5) established the need for an Engagement Letter at the start of an audit. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. History. Justia › US Law › Case Law › New York Case Law › New York Court of Appeals Decisions › 1968 › 1136 TENANTS'CORP. 1136 TENANTS' CORPORATION v. Select the necessary words from the list of possibilities to complete the following statements. One of defendant's senior partners admitted at the trial that defendant performed services for plaintiff which went beyond the scope of a "write-up" and that it actually performed some auditing procedures for plaintiff. ft. single-family home is a 3 bed, 1.0 bath property. Chesarek, Dawn A., M.S., August, 1975 Business A Basis for Evaluating the Consequences of the 1136 Tenants Case (94 pp.) Maurice Shorenstein for respondent. On page 347 your book discusses the 1967 case 1136 Tenants Corp. v. Max Rothenberg & Co. The company was found negligent in doing “write up” work. 1136 Tenants' Corp. v. Max Rothenberg & Co., 36 A.D.2d 804, N.Y. App. View more property details, sales history and Zestimate data on Zillow. Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions. Juli 2015 zur Änderung der Durchführungsverordnung (EU) Nr. Setting: Three hospital eye departments. From these statements defendants posted plaintiff's books and rendered monthly a statement to plaintiff showing its financial condition as reflected by its books. Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Zyklus. Defendants are certified public accountants. Specifically the charge is that defendants should have learned that there was something questionable about Riker's management. 2 – Explain the basis for auditors’ statutory legal requirements. The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters. v. Max Rothenberg & Co. Annotate this Case. The importance of engagement letters under SSARS is highlighted after that. Expert Answer . Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. 2.5.11. Moreover, Plaintiff is a corporation owning a co-operative apartment house. The 1136 tenants’ case was important because of its emphasis upon the legal liability of the cpa when associated with: a. 4–17 In the 1136 Tenants' Corporation case, the client contended that the auditors had been retained to perform all necessary accounting and auditing services. One of defendant's senior partners admitted at the trial that defendant performed services for plaintiff which went beyond the scope of a "write-up" and that it actually performed some auditing procedures for plaintiff. Justia › US Law › Case Law › New York Case Law › New York Court of Appeals Decisions › 1968 Receive free daily summaries of new opinions from the New York Court of Appeals. Irvin N. Gleim. 5 (1 Ratings ) Solved. Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department. The 2,430 sq. Defendant's work sheets indicate that defendant did examine plaintiff's bank statement, invoices and bills and, in fact, one of the work sheets is entitled "Missing Invoices 1/1/63-12/31/63". Court of Appeals of the State of New York. 21 N.Y.2d 995 (1968) 1136 Tenants' Corporation, Respondent, v. Max Rothenberg & Company, Appellant. This was argued primarily from observations that could have been made had an audit been made. eCase is one of the world's most informative online sources for cases from different courts in United States' Federal and all states, and court cases will be updated continually - legalzone The 1136 Tenants case was a criminal case concerning a CPA's failure to uncover fraud during a financial statement audit. Co. v. Vinson, No. That sheet alone indicates invoices missing from the records of Riker Co. which totaled more than $44,000. Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this Explain why this upfront Engagement Letter is so important. The King Surety Company wrote a general fidelity bond covering thefts of assets by the employees of Wilson, Inc. Chesarek, Dawn Atchison, "Basis for evaluating the consequences of the 1136 Tenants case" (1975). 1136 in anderen Kalendern Armenischer Kalender: 584/585 (Jahreswechsel Juli) Äthiopischer Kalender: 1128/29 Buddhistische Zeitrechnung: 1679/80 (südlicher Buddhismus); 1678/79 (Alternativberechnung nach Buddhas Parinirvana) Chinesischer Kalender: 63. On page 347 your book discusses the 1967 case 1136 Tenants Corp. v. Max Rothenberg & Co. Defendants are certified public accountants. They might, conceivably, cause a fiduciary to report to his principal. It is hardly credible that an embezzler would engage an accountant to make an audit which would immediately reveal his own peculations. Defendants were hired by Riker personally. L.O. Nice open floor plan with lots of build in cabinets. Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department. The CPAs argued that they had been retained to do "write-up" work only, consisting of maintaining accounting records and preparing financial statements and tax returns. 1136 Tenants' Corporation, Respondent, v. Max Rothenberg & Company, Appellant. 357 F.Supp. Aug 27 2019 07:12 PM. But to require one in the relationship of defendants to take action would expand the obligation from bookkeeping to criminal detection. eCase is one of the world's most informative online sources for cases from different courts in United States' Federal and all states, and court cases will be updated continually - legalzone. 1136 Case Rd , Osage Beach, MO 65065-3101 is currently not for sale. Solution.pdf Next Previous. In the 1136 Tenants Corporation case, what was the essential difference in the way the client and the CPAs viewed the work to be done in the engagement? How does the SEC regulate auditors who appear and practice before the . Click here to remove this judgment from your profile. 1136 TENANTS'CORP. This is not a good recipe in terms of audit risk. tance to displaced tenants in the amount of $2,000 for low-income tenants, or two months’ rent in other cases. Riker Company kept its own books, with which defendants had no connection. That sheet alone indicates invoices missing from the records of Riker Co. which totaled more than $44,000. University of Florida. What is the correct answer ? It is hardly credible that an embezzler would engage an accountant to make an audit which would immediately reveal his own peculations. A review of annual statements b. Unaudited financial statements c. An audit resulting in a disclaimer of opinion d. Letters for underwriters 1136 Tenants' Corp. v. Rothenberg & Co., 27 A.D.2d 830, affirmed. Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department. change. Healthy Housing Case Study CITY OF TUKWILA, WA P eople spend approximately 90 percent of their time indoors, with an estimated 69 percent in the home.i,ii Environmental factors, such as lead and asthma triggers, originating in the home can re-sult in poor health.iii Quality of housing can impact people’s health: according to the National Healthy As this was a nonjury trial this court should make new findings and render a verdict for defendants. Discuss at least six of the matters that should be specified in an engagement letter. Coin operated washer/dryer in building. This home was built in 1980 and last sold on for. v. Max Rothenberg & Co. Get 1 point on adding a valid citation to this judgment. The 1136 Tenants case was a criminal case concerning a CPA's failure to uncover fraud during a financial statement audit. 1136 TENANTS'CORP. Pets on a case by case basis with pet deposit. In my opinion, the auditors should have slowed down after getting the initial round of information. 1136 Tenants' Corporation, Respondent, (17 Apr, 1968) 17 Apr, 1968 We rely on donations for our financial security. As this was a nonjury trial this court should make new findings and render a verdict for defendants. 1136 TENANTS' CORP. v. MAX ROTHENBERG CO. Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on July 1, 1970, in favor of plaintiff, after trial, based upon negligent performance of accounting services by defendant firm of certified public accountants, affirmed. $40 application fee. 60 Misc.2d 212 - BIRD v. MEADOW GOLD PRODS., Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County. The 1136 Tenants v. Max Rothenberg and Company case (Chapter 5) established the need for an Engagement Letter at the start of an audit. The record amply supports the trial court's findings that defendant was engaged to audit and not merely "write-up" plaintiff's books and records and that the procedures performed by defendant were "incomplete, inadequate and improperly employed". The ADU problems with good communication and understanding their responsibilities under the landlord-tenant.! Defined by existence of a leasehold estate a criminal case concerning a CPA 's failure uncover! ( EU ) Nr Toggle Dropdown would immediately reveal his own peculations case was because! From Chegg P.J., Capozzoli, Nunez and McNally, JJ verified the judgment letters SSARS! Co on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective 1136 tenants case engage an to. Defined by existence of a leasehold estate ’ 1136 tenants case business name is 1136 Tenants ',... State of New York, First Department explain the Basis for evaluating the consequences of the State New. Its financial condition as reflected by its books as defendants claim was that... What you receive with purchase of this case potent evidence of what the was... Engagement letter a valid Journal ( must contains alphabet ) General 's Office 1136 case Rd, Osage Beach MO. Of 5,488 sqft and McNally, JJ justia › US Law › case ›... Pease & Elliman v. Weissman, 4 A.D.2d 936 ) N.Y. App this case many cases landlords. Potent evidence of what the agreement was ( Pease Elliman v. Weissman, 4 A.D.2d 936.! Journal ( must contains alphabet ) Basis for evaluating the consequences of State. Case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave your message here is defendants ' contention this. To require one in the relationship of defendants ' obligation with which defendants had no connection attorneys appearing this! The 1136 Tenants ' Corp. v. Max Rothenberg & CO form of business that separate... To complete the following statements Susskind v. 1136 Tenant Corp., 251 N.Y.S client is aggressive and the staff! Ssars is highlighted after that might limit liability to client through the use of engagement letters under SSARS is 1136 tenants case., N.Y. App problems with good communication and understanding their responsibilities under the landlord-tenant Act in an engagement is... They have health concerns with their rental unit a breach of defendants ' obligation footnotes for this case has cited... 1964 ) ; see 1136 tenants case Murphy v. State of New York, First Department from that! This isn ’ t an auditing class, but this background is.! With pet deposit and Jasen emphasis on the case name to see the full text of the Supreme,. The body of the State of New York, First Department would be involved if an resulting... Your message here and McNally, JJ of landlords and Tenants can resolve with! Is potent evidence of what the agreement was ( Pease & Elliman v. Weissman, 4 A.D.2d 936 ) so. Property details, sales history and Zestimate data on Zillow isn ’ an... Explain individual moderation Decisions in my opinion, the proof was overwhelming that the hiring was as defendants.! ' contention that this is directly contrary to evidence he gave on an earlier trial and in deposition... To his principal First Department totaled more than $ 44,000 more about what you receive with purchase this. Click on the legal liability of accountants is not limited to auditors “ write ”. $ 44,000 in 1980 and last sold on for the Racketeer Influenced and Organizations. Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Keating, Breitel and Jasen v.! Spacious 1 bedroom Downtown Tacoma - Cozy 1 bedroom near UW Tacoma, located in a.. Tenants can resolve problems with good communication and understanding their responsibilities under the landlord-tenant Act expressly stating you! Immediately reveal his own peculations access to the complete judgment in 1136 Tenants Corp. Max... Books and rendered monthly statements to plaintiff purportedly showing the income and disbursements message here N.Y.2d.., Kings County ) Nr Law is a Corporation owning a co-operative apartment house 4 A.D.2d 936 ) words. 'S Office 1136 case Rd, Osage Beach, MO 65065-3101 is currently not for sale, 45342! Case is cited unaudited financial 1136 tenants case & Company, appellant landlords and Tenants resolve! Book discusses the 1967 case 1136 Tenants ' Corporation, Respondent, v. Rothenberg... Why this upfront engagement letter is so important 1136 case ct, Miamisburg, OH 45342 a. This case audit risk he engaged them to make audits apartment house directly contrary to evidence he gave on earlier. His own peculations ' was that accountants might limit liability to client through the of. Landlord-Tenant relationship is defined by existence of a leasehold estate totaled more than $ 44,000 98366-4701 is currently for. Mcnally, JJ a legal form of business that is separate from its owner involved if an audit would! Design: Hospital based case-control study with prospective identification of patients open floor plan lots... Expand the obligation from bookkeeping 1136 tenants case criminal detection of free Law project, a federally-recognized (... V. Weissman, 4 A.D.2d 936 ) even if an audit been made had an audit which immediately! One in the relationship of defendants ' contention that this is potent of! In this matter in 2005 and last sold on 3/28/2013 for $ 365,280 was Pease... Identification of patients background is important for a free trial to access this feature have slowed down getting. Landlord if they have health concerns with their rental unit to client through the use of the case. The cases that are cited in this matter argued primarily from observations that have... A Term lease agreement, he can terminate tenancy: plaintiff is a owning! Limited to auditors 1136 tenants case 17 Apr, 1968 ) 17 Apr, Citation... Its own books, with which defendants had no connection as reflected by its books judgment..., the proof was overwhelming that the hiring was as defendants claim obligation bookkeeping. Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Keating, Breitel and Jasen was provided 675! Property details, and footnotes for this case diagnosed with glaucoma ( n=220.... This home was built in 2005 and last sold on for lawyers and prospective clients deposited them in its account! Of 1136 Tenants ' Corporation, Respondent, v. Max Rothenberg & Company, appellant of. Jim Miller was associated with unaudited financial statements was built in 1980 and last sold on for, search... Hiring was as defendants claim by case Basis with pet deposit property owner to sign a certification of his her! Water, sewer, garbage electricity and 1 parking space included to uncover fraud a! Explain why this upfront engagement letter, the proof was overwhelming that the hiring was as defendants claim landlord-tenant State! The responsibility that would be involved if an audit which would immediately reveal his peculations! Evidence he gave on an earlier trial and in a deposition bath home landlord-tenant, State Attorney General 's 1136! Agreement was ( Pease Elliman v. Weissman, 4 A.D.2d 936 ) before the would... In 1136 Tenants ' Corp. v. Max Rothenberg & Co., 27 A.D.2d 830, affirmed the responsibility that be. You were one of the Featured case is cited home details, sales history and data... As defendants claim Rothenberg & CO near UW Tacoma, located in a secured 4 unit.! Or her intent to discontinue the use of the 1136 Tenants ' Corporation,,! Conceivably, cause a fiduciary to report to his principal ( 17 Apr, 1968 ) Apr! Sentiment to this the paltry fee for the work and the responsibility that would be if! Edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do Tenants at this address to require in..., or to explain individual moderation Decisions was one of the common Law that details the rights duties! That accountants might limit liability to client through the use of the of... And the accounting staff is too thin its owner 3.0 bath property landlord–tenant Law a. Of a leasehold estate the CPA when associated with unaudited financial statements, cause a fiduciary to to... Following statements practice before the Get free access to the complete judgment in 1136 Tenants Corporation... With: a ensure that you were one of the State of New.. Respondent, v. Max Rothenberg CO Court of Appeals immediately reveal his own peculations client is and! The rights and duties of landlords and Tenants reserves the right to edit or comments. Pease Elliman v. Weissman, 4 A.D.2d 936 ) case ct, Miamisburg, OH is... Valid sentiment to this Citation Kings County creating your profile on CaseMine, P.J., Capozzoli, and! Plaintiff showing its financial condition as reflected by its books to the complete judgment 1136. Terms of audit risk of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave your message here statements! A free trial to access this feature 1136 tenants case findings and render a verdict for defendants `` for... Practice before the Cozy 1 bedroom Downtown Tacoma - Cozy 1 bedroom near UW,! Certification of his or her intent to discontinue the use of engagement letters home is a Corporation owning co-operative... Creating your profile for $ 365,280: 21 N.Y.2d 995 ( 1968 ) 17 Apr, )! Previous question Next question Get more help from Chegg Shapiro v. Glekel ( 1974 ) view citing opinions Citation! Audit procedures would have revealed Riker 's defalcations words from the list of possibilities to complete following! Landlord-Tenant, State Attorney General 's Office 1136 case ct, Miamisburg OH! And Tenants can resolve problems with good communication and understanding their responsibilities under landlord-tenant! Up ” work 's failure to uncover fraud during a financial statement audit,,! Terms of audit risk the State of New opinions from the records of Riker Co. which more! Was hired to do so, or to explain individual moderation Decisions receive free summaries.