“We know our way in and out of the courtroom.”

Recent Case Results

  • The following information is a sample of our past results. Not all results obtained by Chapman and Associates, P.C. have been provided.
  • The results are not necessarily representative of results obtained by the lawyer. 
  • Every case is different and each case must be evaluated and handled on its own merits. The circumstances of your case may differ from the results provided.
  • The information provided has not been reviewed or approved by the Florida Bar.
By clicking on the case titles, you are acknowledging that you understand the above disclaimer and that you wish to view information about our results.

PEO wins big and defeats MESC allegation of over $26,000,000 in unpaid unemployment taxes for alleged SUTA dumping

  • Venue – The State of Michigan State Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules
  • Demand – $26,000,000
  • Verdict – No Cause – PEO wins
  • Details – Client, a PEO (Professional Employer Organization) was sued by Michigan Employment Security Commission for alleged SUTA (State Unemployment Tax Act) dumping. The MESC alleged that the PEO underpaid unemployment taxes by $4,290,027.99 resulting in a claim for damages totaling $26,627,318.06 after interest and penalty fees. PEO sought judicial relief following the Agency's determination of unpaid taxes for alleged SUTA dumping.

    The alleged dumping took place prior to July 1, 2005. The parties stipulated the new 2005 changes did not apply. The State of Michigan State Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules concluded that “while the PEO did create new entities and transfer employees to such entities to reduce unemployment taxes, the practice was not prohibited by the Act prior to July 1, 2005”.

    The Administrative Judge reversed the Agency’s determination.

  • Attorney – Ronald Chapman

Medium size Midwest employer victim of fraud, misrepresentation, conversion and RICO claim by a local Professional Employer Organization (PEO)

  • Venue - United States District Court - Eastern Michigan
  • Details - Employer retained the services of a PEO to reduce payroll costs. The PEO agreed to a maximum fee of 1.65% of gross payroll. The agreement also provided that the PEO would process payroll and pay all appropriate state and federal taxes and that the employer would reimburse the PEO for “payroll taxes”. The agreement provided the payroll taxes would be processed as a pass-through, meaning the employer would be charged for the actual payroll taxes. The agreement was renewed for many years. At the termination of the agreement it was learned that the PEO falsely and intentionally overcharged the employer for SUTA and FUTA taxes. FUTA taxes are paid on the first $7,000 of payroll per employee, per year and SUTA taxes are paid on the first $9,000 of payroll per employee, per year. The PEO charged our client for SUTA and FUTA taxes on the gross payroll and pocketed the difference. The Employer was damaged in excess of $475,000 from bogus “tax” charges. When confronted the PEO stated, “we have expenses to.”
  • Status - Class action lawsuit filed and case is pending
  • Attorneys - Ronald Chapman & Carly Van Thomme

Construction manager for a large Midwest corporation accused of getting “Kick-backs” during large expansion project

  • Venue - Oakland County Circuit Court
  • Allegations - White Collar Crime, Financial Fraud, Employee Dishonesty, Theft and Embezzlement
  • Details - The corporation alleged that the employee designed a scheme to turn corporate funds budgeted for a construction project into personal funds. Allegedly the employee would generate invoices for services rendered that were not performed.  The employer would pay the invoice and the employee would pocket the proceeds.  It was also alleged that the employee solicited several vendors to participate in the scheme and “kick-back” proceeds to the employee. Allegedly the employee developed a scheme that required vendors to either kick-back proceeds to him or pay him for the privilege of handling the employer’s work.   The employer alleged the total loss due to the various alleged schemes was in excess of $3,000,000.
  • Status - Case settled for payment of $1,000,000
  • Attorney - Ronald Chapman

Client's win against claim that they sold home without disclosing termite infestation

  • Venue - Macomb County Circuit Court
  • Result - Dismissal and monetary sanctions granted in favor of clients
  • Details - Plaintiffs sued Clients to rescind the $152,000 purchase of their home.  Clients sold the home in good faith to Plaintiffs during the summer of 2009.  Previously, clients purchased the home in 2004 and made extensive repairs and renovations to the home during the five years that they owned it.  Defendants completed in good faith a seller’s disclosure form at the time that Plaintiffs purchased the home.  After Plaintiffs purchased and moved into the home, Plaintiffs alleged that they discovered an infestation of termites and also alleged that they had problems with the roof leaking and problems with the siding on the home.  On behalf of Clients, our office filed a motion for summary disposition, arguing Clients were not aware of any of these issues at the time of closing.  Based on the briefs and oral argument, the Court dismissed the case, holding Plaintiffs had no evidence that Clients unlawfully and purposefully concealed any of the alleged defects from Plaintiffs.

    • Attorneys - David B. Mammel and Carly Van Thomme

Client awarded $175,000 after being physically assaulted by his neighbor

  • Venue - Oakland County Circuit Court
  • Verdict - $175,000 Awarded to Client
  • Details - Client was physically assaulted by his neighbor. Defendant struck client in the face several times, causing client to suffer a fractured eye with muscle damage resulting in permanent double vision. Defendant rejected mediation result of $50,000 and the case was taken to trial. After two hours of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in favor of our client, awarding him $175,000.

    • Attorney - David B. Mammel

 

Back to Top

Attorneys

  • Our dedicated and exceptionally talented lawyers work together developing a collegial environment, working as a team to develop successful defense and trial strategies.
  • View Attorney Bios

Let Us Help You Now