CFO.com Reports on Lawsuit by Former AmeriTex CFO Against CBIZ
March 30, 2026 – CFO.com reports today on major developments in the case by Brewer client and former AmeriTex CFO Chris Podlasek against CBIZ (formerly Marcum). As reported, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas recently denied a motion by CBIZ to halt the case, clearing the path for the matter to proceed toward trial.
Mr. Podlasek alleges that CBIZ’s recently acquired subsidiary, accounting firm Marcum LLP, knowingly participated in a breach of fiduciary duty by producing a fraudulent, “low-ball valuation” of AmeriTex. The lawsuit claims this action was part of a scheme designed to deprive Mr. Podlasek of more than $25 million owed to him for his 1.5% equity stake in the company.
The complaint, originally filed in June 2025, asserts that Marcum was enlisted by AmeriTex’s CEO to “pretend it performed an independent valuation” in order to artificially depress the payout owed to Mr. Podlasek upon his departure. The lawsuit brings claims against CBIZ for knowing participation in a breach of fiduciary duty and civil conspiracy.
“As a career CFO, our client understands the damage that can be accomplished by valuation firms willing to tailor their work to the desires of the one paying them in disregard of the standards of their profession,” Brewer said of Podlasek.
CFO.com reports that, according to his attorneys, Podlasek seeks $30 million each from CBIZ and AmeriTex, a defendant in a separate action.
The case is Podlasek v. CBIZ, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.
Read more here.
Former CFO Prevails – Judge Denies CBIZ Bid to Halt Valuation Fraud Lawsuit; Discovery to Proceed
March 25, 2026 – In a major development, a federal judge denied motions by CBIZ Inc. and CBIZ MAG LLC, a successor entity to Marcum LLP’s non-attest business (“Marcum”), to abate a lawsuit alleging Marcum conspired with others to produce a materially understated business valuation. The ruling allows the case to move into full discovery into the allegations of intentional breaches of duty. It also provides an inside look at the closely guarded world of corporate valuation services.
U.S. District Judge Alfred H. Bennett of the Southern District of Texas entered the ruling on Tuesday in Podlasek v. CBIZ Inc., CBIZ MAG LLC, Civil Action No. 4:25-CV-03047.
The lawsuit was filed on June 30, 2025, by Christopher Podlasek, former chief financial officer of AmeriTex Holdings LLC, a major infrastructure supplier.
Podlasek alleges that Marcum produced an artificially low valuation of AmeriTex to deprive him of more than $25 million owed for his 1.5% equity stake. According to Podlasek, AmeriTex's internal estimates valued the company at up to $3 billion. Marcum valued AmeriTex at $789 million. The complaint alleges that, under pressure from AmeriTex leadership, Marcum abandoned its professional standards, producing a low-ball valuation based upon “backdated” projections that conflicted with contemporaneous bullish valuations given to lenders.
“The ruling clears the path to trial,” said William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors and lead counsel to Mr. Podlasek. “Mr. Podlasek will move immediately into discovery and a full debate regarding Defendant’s conduct.”
The complaint notes that the alleged conduct occurred during the same period in which Marcum was sanctioned by the SEC and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board for systemic quality control failures, resulting in millions of dollars in fines.
“Valuation professionals are supposed to be the independent arbiters that investors, executives and counterparties rely upon to ensure major transactions reflect reality,” Brewer added. “When that process is compromised – as we contend it was here – the damage extends far beyond any one deal. It strikes at the heart of professional accountability and the trust that underpins our financial markets.”
Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors Hails the Supreme Court's Denial of Certiorari of the State Court Challenge of the N.Y. Even Year Election Law
March 23, 2026 — Today, the United States Supreme Court denied review of the state court challenge to New York's Even Year Election Law (EYEL). The denial does not reach the merits of any of the federal constitutional claims now pending before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York in New York Republican State Committee et al. v. Hochul et al., No. 2:25-cv-6083.
William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors and lead counsel for plaintiffs therein — a broad coalition of counties, local candidates, and voters — issued the following statement:
"Today's action by SCOTUS removes a hurdle to the efforts of our Plaintiffs to move their claims forward. The State rested its defense strategy on delay — by using the Petition for review of the state court proceedings to interfere with our case . That strategy has now run its course. There is no longer any reason to delay expedited resolution of the Constitutional claims presented in our matter. We represent a coalition of plaintiffs whose federal claims have never been heard on the merits — and we look forward to changing that before Judge Brown."
We will ask the Court to give new dates for the pre-motion conference, which was previously adjourned pending the Supreme Court's action. Plaintiffs will respond promptly.
CONTACT:
Ali Dukakis
Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors
Office: 212-527-2580
Email: ajd@brewerattorneys.com
Industry Expert Publishes Analysis of Foster v. WPP, Examining Allegations of Retaliation for Whistleblower Report That WPP Built a $1 Billion Non-Disclosed Profit Center at Clients' Expense
March 20, 2026 — Nick Manning, founder of Encyclomedia International and Non-Executive Chairman of Media Marketing Compliance (MMC), who served as Chief Strategy Officer at Ebiquity and co-founded Manning Gottlieb OMD has published a detailed analysis of Foster v. WPP, the retaliation and wrongful termination lawsuit pending in New York Supreme Court. The analysis is available on Mr. Manning's LinkedIn.
The case was brought by Richard Foster, a 17-year veteran of GroupM, WPP's media-buying arm, who served as global CEO of Motion Content Group. Mr. Foster alleges WPP terminated him in retaliation for raising concerns that the company was improperly profiting from advertising rebates and discounts — rather than returning those savings to clients — creating a non-disclosed profit center worth nearly $1 billion in 2024 alone.
Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors retained Mr. Manning as an expert witness on behalf of Mr. Foster. His analysis scrutinizes court documents, including "Project Claridges," that exposes the media trading practices at the center of Foster's whistleblower report, as well as the implications of those practices for WPP's newly announced "Elevate 28" strategy.
"Nick Manning's analysis makes clear what this case already demonstrates from the outset — that WPP surreptitiously prioritized its own financial interests over the clients to whom they owed fiduciary duties," said William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors and lead counsel to Mr. Foster.
"Richard Foster blew the whistle on closely guarded media trading practices internally, at considerable personal cost, because he believed the clients deserved better. Mr. Manning's work brings expert weight to the court record, and we welcome the scrutiny," Mr. Brewer added.
The full analysis can be viewed here.
Media Contact:
Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors
212-527-2580
Brewer Foundation Announces Partnership with Howard University Speech and Debate Team
March 19, 2026 — The Brewer Foundation is proud to announce an ongoing partnership with the Howard University Speech and Debate Team (HUSDT) and the International Public Policy Forum (IPPF).
Founded in 2001, the International Public Policy Forum is jointly administered by the Brewer Foundation and New York University and is the world’s only international high school debate competition that combines written and oral advocacy on issues of public policy.
"The IPPF challenges students to think critically and tackle the world's most pressing policy issues," said William A. Brewer III, Chairman of the Brewer Foundation and Founder of the IPPF. "Howard's debate team is among the best in the country, and their involvement strengthens our mission to develop the next generation of advocates."
Each year, teams across the globe submit qualifying round essays starting in October. From the initial round of essays, the "Top 64" teams advance to a single elimination written debate tournament, narrowing the field from 64, to 32, then 16, and ultimately to the "Elite Eight" teams. The "Elite Eight" travel to New York City on an all-expense paid trip, underwritten entirely by the Brewer Foundation, to compete in live oral debates before panels of esteemed judges. The IPPF World Champion takes home the coveted Brewer Cup along with a $10,000 grand prize.
This year, Finals Weekend will be hosted at NYU Law on April 18th, with an educational symposium preceding it on April 17th. HUSDT Director Angela Minor will join four other educational leaders and academics as a panelist at the Symposium and as a judge for the IPPF Final debate. As part of the partnership, Howard debaters serve as judges for the tournament’s written rounds.
Minor reflected on this partnership noting, "We are honored and excited to join the Brewer Foundation and NYU in the IPPF this year. Our debaters look forward to applying their competitive forensics experience to support students across the globe."
This season's focus on the global education crisis — together with the partnership with Howard — reflects the Brewer Foundation's commitment to expanding educational opportunity and civic engagement worldwide.
Brewer Foundation Announces “Elite 8” Teams in the 2025-26 International Public Policy Forum
New York, March 18, 2026 — The Brewer Foundation is pleased to announce the “Elite 8” teams in the 25th anniversary International Public Policy Forum (IPPF). The advancing teams earn an all-expenses-paid trip to New York City to compete in the IPPF Finals, where the IPPF World Champions will be awarded a $10,000 grand prize and the coveted Brewer Cup.
Founded in 2001, the IPPF is jointly administered by the Brewer Foundation and New York University and is the world’s only international debate competition that challenges high school students to engage in oral and written debate on matters of public policy.
The annual IPPF began in October where a record-breaking 332 teams from 39 countries submitted qualifying round essays affirming or negating the following: Resolved: The Group of 20 Nations should levy a global education tax equal to 1% of each member country's gross domestic product to establish a dedicated international organization that supports the provision of universal, free, quality primary and secondary education.
From there, the “Top 64” competed in a series of single elimination debates, narrowing the field to 32, then 16, and now 8. The “Sweet 16” round began in February, during which the teams exchanged written arguments. A panel of judges evaluated each debate to determine this year’s “Elite 8” teams who hail from schools in three countries and eight U.S. states.
“This year’s ‘Elite 8’ teams demonstrate not only intellectual rigor, but a deep passion and commitment to solving one of the world's most urgent challenges, the global education crisis,” said William A. Brewer III, Chairman of the Brewer Foundation and Founder of the IPPF. “I look forward to welcoming these exceptional young scholars to New York City, where their written arguments will come to life in oral debates.”
Results of the “Sweet 16”:
BASIS International School Shenzhen from Shenzhen, China advances over Kealakehe Public High School from Kailua Kona, Hawaii
Ivy Bridge Academy (Team 1) from Johns Creek, Georgia advances over Jasper High School from Plano, Texas
North Allegheny Senior High School from Wexford, Pennsylvania advances over Pomperaug Regional High School from Southbury, Connecticut
Çevre High School from Istanbul, Turkey advances over Hamilton High School from Chandler, Arizona
Delbarton School from Morristown, New Jersey advances over Ivy Bridge Academy (Team 2) from Johns Creek, Georgia
Millburn High School from Millburn, New Jersey advances over Notre Dame San Jose from San Jose, California
Troy High School from Troy, Michigan advances over Saint Paul Preparatory from Seoul, Republic of Korea
Westwood High School from Austin, Texas advances over Marymount Academy International from Montreal, Canada
The IPPF Finals weekend kicks off on Friday, April 17, 2026, from 4 - 6p.m. at the NYU King Juan Carlos I of Spain Center (KJCC) for an educational symposium, Educating the World: Obligation, Opportunity, or Overreach, where leading topic experts and academics will engage the same topic debated by the students. On Saturday, April 18, 2026, the final debates will be held at the NYU School of Law from 8a.m. – 6:30 p.m. The semifinal and final debates will be livestreamed for those who cannot join in person.
For more information visit www.ippfdebate.com.
For tickets to the Symposium or the IPPF Finals, visit here.
Texas Lawbook Reports on Brewer Client Caroline Hill, High-Profile Trust Dispute
March 13, 2026 – Texas Lawbook reports today on the latest developments in a Dallas County probate court case brought by Brewer client Caroline M. Hill, a 21-year-old Vanderbilt University student and the youngest child of Al Hill III. As reported, Hill seeks access to the books and records of the Lyda Hunt-Margaret Trust. Her lawsuit contends the trust, which should contain at least $15 million, has instead been "looted" and "dissolved." The coverage appeared the next day in The Dallas Morning News, “Hill Family Feud: Trust faces challenge amid claim $15M was ‘looted.’”
Explaining why Ms. Hill came to Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, lead counsel William A. "Bill" Brewer III told the Texas Lawbook that his client was "a very small child" when earlier litigation involving her father and grandfather was making headlines — and some of that fighting predates her birth entirely. "She literally just wanted information about the trust and the way in which it was administered and what happened to the corpus — all things that, under Texas trust law and the trust instrument itself, she's entitled to," Brewer said. "So, when Caroline began asking questions and didn't get satisfactory answers, she asked us to push forward in whatever way the law permits."
The Texas Lawbook reports that defendants attempted to block Caroline's lawsuit in both federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, arguing her claims were barred by a 2010 global settlement agreement reached by her father. Both efforts failed. U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay issued a 26-page opinion rejecting that argument, noting that the Lyda Hunt-Margaret Trust "was never litigated, mentioned, or incorporated" into the prior settlement. He called the argument “absurd and unreasonable.” The Fifth Circuit then denied the defendants' request for an injunction pending appeal in an opinion issued March 10.
With those obstacles cleared, the case is now moving forward before Judge Ingrid M. Warren in Dallas County Probate Court, where defendants face a March 16 discovery deadline.
“Hopefully, come Monday, we actually get answers to these easily understood, obvious questions," Brewer said. "But it might be that we end up in front of the probate court, getting that judge to help us force them to answer these questions that are properly posed and, we think, required to be fully answered under Texas law."
Read The Texas Lawbook here.
Read The Dallas Morning News here.
Law360 Covers Brewer Client Williams Simons & Landis in Fee Dispute Against Bartko Pavia LLP
March 11, 2026 – Law360 reports today on Brewer client Williams Simons & Landis PC and its opposition to a motion to dismiss a federal lawsuit it filed against California law firm Bartko Pavia LLP over millions in attorneys' fees arising from landmark litigation against Walmart.
As reported, WSL, a Texas litigation boutique, represented RiskOn International and Zest Labs Holdings in the underlying Walmart trade secrets case, securing a $115 million jury verdict before being replaced by Bartko Pavia. WSL contends that its years of work — developing the evidentiary record, legal strategy, and advocacy — laid the groundwork for a subsequent verdict and settlement totaling more than $325 million. WSL alleges it is owed $11 million in fees under a litigation funding agreement and that Bartko Pavia used its control over the settlement proceeds to block payment while increasing its own recovery from the same pool of funds.
Law 360 reports that in opposing Bartko Pavia's motion to dismiss, WSL argued that the firm's invocation of Texas attorney immunity is misplaced. Under Texas law, that doctrine protects zealous client advocacy — not conduct undertaken to advance a lawyer's own financial interests. WSL further argued that its claims for tortious interference with contract and unjust enrichment are adequately pled and that factual disputes raised by Bartko Pavia cannot be resolved at the pleading stage.
Brewer partner William A. Brewer III, counsel for WSL, told Law360: "Our client earned its fees. What allegedly followed — an effort by Bartko Pavia to freeze WSL out of its share of the settlement proceeds to increase its own recovery from the same pool of funds — is precisely the kind of self-dealing that the law does not protect. WSL deserves its day in court."
To read more, click here.