Where there is smoke there is fire.

This is generally the case when whistle-blowers raise concerns about activities within their company.

For this reason, last Tuesday, shares of Per-Se Technologies fell more than 15 percent on very heavy volume after the company revealed that it was informed about an anonymous letter sent to several financial research analysts that follow the company. The letter alleges improper accounting and business activities.

The company said in a press release it believes this letter is from a disgruntled former employee. "The company believes strongly that the letter's allegations are baseless," it added.

Per-Se's implicit denial and aim to discredit the "disgruntled employee" evokes memories of a case involving Coca-Cola.

Early last month the soft drink giant settled a whistle-blower lawsuit brought by Matthew Whitley, a former internal auditor, agreeing to pay him $100,000, the severance benefits to which he is entitled by virtue of his layoff (approximately $140,000), and his attorney's fees ($300,000).

Back in May, Whitley, formerly the finance director for supply management in Coca-Cola's fountain division, filed a lawsuit against the company, according to The Wall Street Journal. One of his allegations was that from approximately 1998 to 2001, the company overstated net revenue and gross profit by recording marketing allowances to some customers as expenses rather than as rebates.

The lawsuit also alleged that Coca-Cola fabricated a market survey in order to convince a customer to take part in a frozen-beverage campaign.

Now, keep in mind that all along Coke characterized Whitley as a "disgruntled former employee" and disparaged his work.

But, then in June the company tacitly confirmed Whitley's charges when it admitted it improperly influenced a "Frozen Coke" marketing test at Burger King. Coca-Cola also issued a statement noting that "further examination was warranted regarding the financial arrangements between the fountain division and certain equipment suppliers."

In addition, the company took a $9 million pretax write-down.

Last week, another whistle-blower — Duncan Goldie-Morrison, a former Bank of America Corp. executive — said he is seeking $7.3 million plus damages from the bank, asserting he was dismissed for criticizing questionable practices, also according to The Wall Street Journal.

The Journal reported the claims are part of an arbitration filing with the NASD.

In addition to unspecified damages, Goldie-Morrison is seeking a $7.3 million payment, including stock options valued at $5 million that were revoked or abridged, a $2.1 million bonus he did not receive and $101,000 in charitable and political contributions he made to a museum and to a political candidate in North Carolina, the Journal said.

Meanwhile, the Securities and Exchange Commission recently became embroiled in a controversy over a whistle-blower who reportedly sent a letter to its Boston office alleging improprieties at Putnam Investment. However, when the whistle-blower did not receive a satisfactory response, he then took his claims to Massachusetts state authorities.

Shortly after this development became public, Juan Marcel Marcelino resigned from his position as the District Administrator of the SEC's Boston District Office.

Next year, whistle-blowers may not need to operate so anonymously once new rules under Sarbanes-Oxley go into effect protecting individuals who identify problems within a company. Companies must have procedures that provide whistle-blowers access to the appropriate individuals within a company, including the audit committee, and companies are forbidden to retaliate against or punish the whistle-blower.