Vaughn Manufacturing is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Vaughn's lawyer states that it is probable that Vaughn will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Vaughn anywhere from $1820000 to $8970000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $5370000. As a result of the above facts, Vaughn should accrue O a loss contingency of $5370000 but not disclose any additional contingency. O a loss contingency of $1820000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $7150000. O no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $1820000 to $8970000. O a loss contingency of $5370000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $3600000.

Vaughn Manufacturing is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Vaughn's lawyer states that it is probable that Vaughn will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Vaughn anywhere from $1820000 to $8970000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $5370000. As a result of the above facts, Vaughn should accrue O a loss contingency of $5370000 but not disclose any additional contingency. O a loss contingency of $1820000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $7150000. O no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $1820000 to $8970000. O a loss contingency of $5370000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $3600000.

SWFT Comprehensive Volume 2019

42nd Edition

ISBN:9780357233306

Author:Maloney

Publisher:Maloney

Chapter16: Accounting Periods And Methods

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 30P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Swifty Corporation is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Swifty's lawyer states that it is probable that Swifty will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Swifty anywhere from $ 1830000 to $ 8960000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $ 5410000. As a result of the above facts, Swifty should accrue a loss contingency of $ 1830000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $ 7130000. a loss contingency of $ 5410000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $ 3550000. no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $ 1830000 to $ 8960000. a loss contingency of $ 5410000 but not disclose any additional contingency.
Superb Corporation is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Superb’s lawyer states that it is probable that Superb will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Superb anywhere from $1,200,000 to $6,000,000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $3,600,000. As a result of the above facts, Superb should accrue Select one: a loss contingency of $3,600,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $2,400,000. a loss contingency of $3,600,000 but not disclose any additional contingency. a loss contingency of $1,200,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $4,800,000. no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $1,200,000 to $6,000,000.
Wooten Co. is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Wooten's lawyer states that it is probable that Wooten will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Wooten anywhere from $1,800,000 to $9,000,000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $5,400,000. As a result of the above facts, Wooten should accrue A) a loss contingency of $1,800,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $7,200,000. B) a loss contingency of $5,400,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $3,600,000. C) a loss contingency of $5,400,000 but not disclose any additional contingency. D) no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $1,800,000 to $9,000,000.
Bu Co. is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Bu's lawyer states that it is probable that Bu will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Bu anywhere from P1,600,000 to P8,000,000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is P 4,800,000. As a result of the above facts, Bu should accrue: *a. a loss contingency of P 4,800,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to P 3,200,000b. a loss contingency of P 1,600,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to P 6,400,000c. a loss contingency of P 4,800,000 but not disclose any additional contingencyd. no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of P 1,600,000 to P 8,000,000
Sheila Company is engaged in the manufacture of chemicals which it exports to other countries. On December 25, 2021, one of its tanks in the production assembly plant exploded. Unfortunately one of its employees was caught by the accident and suffered severe burns all over his body. For damages sustained because of the explosion, the employee sued Sheila and claimed an amount totaling P10,000,000 for physical injuries sustained. The lawyers of Sheila expect that Sheila Company will probably lose the lawsuit and estimate that the company may have to pay an amount in the range of P5,000,000 to P8,000,000. On March 15, 2022, upon the advice of his lawyers, the injured employees offered to have an out of court settlement of P7,500,000. The offer was tendered on the same date and Sheila on the advice of its legal counsel accepted the said offer on March 20, 2022. Sheila’s financial statements for the year ended 2021 was issued on March 30, 2022. Sheila’s financial statements for the year…
Murray reported to the Environmental Protection Agency that his employer was illegally dumping chemicals into a river. His charges were true, and Murray's employer was fined. In retaliation, Murray's employer fired him and made deliberate efforts to prevent Murray from obtaining other employment. Murray sued the employer, claiming that his reputation had been damaged. Murray won his lawsuit and received an award for "damages to his personal and professional reputa- tion and for his mental suffering." Now he would like to know whether the award is taxable. He argues that he was awarded damages as a recovery of his human capital and that a recovery of capital is not income. Is Murray's logic comrect?
On December 31, 2014, SBMA Inc. was a defendant in three litigations provided below: The first case is about environmental violation and the legal counsel determined that it isreasonably possible that SBMA will become liable in a the range of P4,000,000 to P6,000,000. The second case is about illegal dismissal and the legal counsel determined that it is remotethat SBMA will become liable in a reliable estimate of P3,000,000. The third case is about patent infringement and the legal counsel determined that it is probablethat SBMA will become liable in the following expected value:P2,000,000 - 50%P5,000,000 - 30%P10,000,000 - 20%Required: Determine the following for the year ended December 31, 2014:__________1. Accrued Provision on December 31, 2014__________2. Disclosed Contingent Liability on December 31, 2014
Several months ago, Ayers Industries Inc. experienced a hazardous materials spill at one of its plants. As a result, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fined the company $430,000. The company is contesting the fine. In addition, an employee is seeking $540,000 in damages related to the spill. Lastly, a homeowner has sued the company for $270,000. The homeowner lives 30 miles from the plant, but believes that the incident has reduced the home's resale value by $270,000. Ayers’ legal counsel believes that it is probable that the EPA fine will stand. In addition, counsel indicates that an out-of-court settlement of $230,000 has recently been reached with the employee. The final papers will be signed next week. Counsel believes that the homeowner's case is much weaker and will be decided in favor of Ayers. Other litigation related to the spill is possible, but the damage amounts are uncertain. a. Journalize the contingent liabilities associated with the hazardous materials…
Several months ago, Ayers Industries Inc. experienced a hazardous materials spill at one of its plants. As a result, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fined the company $470,000. The company is contesting the fine. In addition, an employee is seeking $540,000 in damages related to the spill. Lastly, a homeowner has sued the company for $300,000. The homeowner lives 30 miles from the plant, but believes that the incident has reduced the home's resale value by $300,000. Ayers’ legal counsel believes that it is probable that the EPA fine will stand. In addition, counsel indicates that an out-of-court settlement of $230,000 has recently been reached with the employee. The final papers will be signed next week. Counsel believes that the homeowner's case is much weaker and will be decided in favor of Ayers. Other litigation related to the spill is possible, but the damage amounts are uncertain. a. Journalize the contingent liabilities associated with the hazardous materials…
Several months ago, Ayers Industries Inc. experienced a hazardous materials spill at one of its plants. As a result, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fined the company $240,000. The company is contesting the fine. In addition, an employee is seeking $220,000in damages related to the spill. Finally, a homeowner has sued the company for $310,000. The homeowner lives 35 miles from the plant but believes that the incident has reduced the home’s resale value by $310,000. Ayers’ legal counsel believes that it is probable that the EPA fine will stand. In addition, counsel indicates that an out-of-court settlement of $125,000 has recently been reached with the employee. The final papers will be signed next week. Counsel believes that the homeowner’s case is much weaker and will be decided in favor of Ayers. Otherlitigation related to the spill is possible, but the damage amounts are uncertain. a. Journalize the contingent liabilities associated with the hazardous materials spill. Use…
Several months ago, Ayers Industries Inc. experienced a hazardous materials spill at one of its plants. As a result, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fined the company $248,000. The company is contesting the fine. In addition, an employee is seeking $213,000 in damages related to the spill. Lastly, a homeowner has sued the company for $324,000. The homeowner lives 35 miles from the plant but believes that the incident has reduced the home’s resale value by $324,000. Ayers’ legal counsel believes that it is probable that the EPA fine will stand. In addition, counsel indicates that an out-of-court settlement of $130,000 has recently been reached with the employee. The final papers will be signed next week. Counsel believes that the homeowner’s case is much weaker and will be decided in favor of Ayers. Other litigation related to the spill is possible, but the damage amounts are uncertain. Required: a. Journalize the contingent liabilities associated with the…
Several months ago, Jones Company experienced a spill of hazardous materials into the White River from one of its plants. As a result, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fined the company $405,000. The company contested the fine. In addition, an employee is seeking $180,000 damages related to the spill. Finally, a homeowner has sued the company for $260,000. Although the homeowner lives 30 miles downstream from the plant, he believes that the spill has reduced his home’s resale value by $260,000. Jones’ legal counsel believes the following will happen in relationship to these incidents: (a) It is probable that the EPA fine will stand. (b) An out-of-court settlement for $165,000 has recently been reached with the employee, with the final papers to be signed next week. (c) Counsel believes that the homeowner’s case is weak and will be decided in favor of Jones Company. (d) Other litigation related to the spill is possible, but the damage amounts are uncertain. …