XML 77 R10.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v2.4.0.8

Commitments and Contingencies | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Mar. 31, 2014
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies |
6. | Commitments and Contingencies
Letters of Credit and Guarantees CBIZ provides letters of credit to landlords (lessors) of its leased premises in lieu of cash security deposits which totaled $2.5 million at March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013. In addition, CBIZ provides license bonds to various state agencies to meet certain licensing requirements. The amount of license bonds outstanding at March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 was $2.3 million and $2.4 million, respectively. CBIZ acted as guarantor on various letters of credit for a CPA firm with which it has an affiliation, which totaled $1.9 million at March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013. CBIZ has recognized a liability for the fair value of the obligations undertaken in issuing these guarantees, which is recorded as other current liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Management does not expect any material changes to result from these instruments as performance under the guarantees is not expected to be required. Legal Proceedings In 2010, CBIZ, Inc. and its subsidiary, CBIZ MHM, LLC (fka CBIZ Accounting, Tax & Advisory Services, LLC) (the “CBIZ Parties”), were named as defendants in lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona and the Superior Court for Maricopa County, Arizona. The federal court case is captioned Robert Facciola, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, and the state court cases are captioned Victims Recovery, LLC v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, Roger Ashkenazi, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, Mary Marsh, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al; and ML Liquidating Trust v. Mayer Hoffman McCann PC, et al. Prior to these suits CBIZ MHM, LLC was named as a defendant in Jeffery C. Stone v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al. The Stone case was subsequently voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff. These lawsuits arose out of the bankruptcy of Mortgages Ltd., a mortgage lender to developers in the Phoenix, Arizona area. Various other professional firms not related to the Company were also named defendants in these lawsuits. Mortgages Ltd. had been audited by Mayer Hoffman McCann PC (“Mayer Hoffman”), a CPA firm that has an administrative services agreement with CBIZ. The lawsuits assert claims against Mayer Hoffman for, among others things, violations of the Arizona Securities Act, common law fraud, and negligent misrepresentation, and seek to hold the CBIZ Parties vicariously liable for Mayer Hoffman’s conduct as either a statutory control person under the Arizona Securities Act or a joint venturer under Arizona common law. CBIZ is not a CPA firm, does not provide audits, and did not audit any of the entities at issue in these lawsuits, nor is CBIZ a control person of, or a joint venture with, Mayer Hoffman. In June 2011, the Facciola court, in which the plaintiffs were seeking to certify a class of all Mortgages Ltd. investors, granted the motions to dismiss filed by the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. After that dismissal order, the plaintiffs moved the court to amend their complaint in an attempt to state a claim against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. In November 2011, the Facciola court denied the plaintiffs’ request to amend the complaint as to the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. In June 2012, the remaining defendants in the Facciola case reached a class action settlement, which the court approved in October 2012. Eighteen class members, however, opted out of the settlement before it was finalized and, in September 2012, filed a new case against all of the defendants in the Facciola case, including the CBIZ Parties (Rader et al v. Greenberg Traurig, LLC, et al). In December 2012, the Facciola plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the dismissal of their case against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. That appeal is currently pending. The plaintiffs, except for the ML Liquidating Trust, are all alleged to have directly or indirectly invested in real estate mortgages through Mortgages Ltd. The Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi and Marsh plaintiffs seek monetary damages equivalent to their alleged losses on those investments. The ML Liquidating Trust asserts errors and omissions and breach of contract claims and is seeking monetary damages. The Ashkenazi complaint alleges damages of approximately $92 million; the Victims Recovery complaint alleges damages of approximately $53 million; the Marsh, Facciola, Rader, and ML Liquidating Trust complaints allege damages in excess of approximately $200 million. The plaintiffs in these suits also seek pre- and post-judgment interest, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. The CBIZ Parties filed motions to dismiss in all remaining cases. On March 11, 2013, the court issued a ruling dismissing the securities fraud and aiding and abetting securities fraud claims against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman in the Marsh, Victims Recovery and Ashkenazi lawsuits, and also dismissed certain other claims in the Ashkenazi and Victims Recovery cases. On April 12, 2013, the court denied the CBIZ Parties’ motion to dismiss the remaining claims in the Ashkenazi lawsuit. On May 7, 2013, the court in the ML Liquidating Trust lawsuit issued a ruling dismissing claims for deepening insolvency damages, negligence and breach of contract and holding that any claims related to the 2004 and 2005 Mayer Hoffman audits were barred by the statute of limitations. The court denied the motion as to the negligent misrepresentation claim. On June 14, 2013, the court dismissed the RICO, fraud and consumer fraud claims in the Marsh lawsuit, and denied the CBIZ Parties’ motion as to the negligent misrepresentation and aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty claims. The CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman, without admitting any liability, have reached settlements in the Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi and Rader lawsuits. In addition, the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman, without admitting any liability, reached a settlement with a single plaintiff from the Marsh lawsuit. The CBIZ Parties did not pay any monetary amounts as part of these settlements. The Victims Recovery complaint had alleged damages of approximately $53 million, the Ashkenazi complaint had alleged damages of approximately $92 million and the Rader complaint alleged damages in excess of $15 million. Discovery is proceeding in the remaining matters (except Facciola, which is on appeal) and no trial dates have been set. The CBIZ Parties deny all allegations of wrongdoing made against them in these actions and are vigorously defending the remaining proceedings. In particular, the CBIZ Parties are not control persons under the Arizona Securities Act of, or in a joint venture with, Mayer Hoffman. The CBIZ Parties do not have, in any respects, the legal right to control Mayer Hoffman’s audits or any say in how the audits are conducted. The Company has been advised by Mayer Hoffman that it denies all allegations of wrongdoing made against it and that it intends to continue vigorously defending the matters. In January 2012, the CBIZ Parties were added as defendants to a lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of California for Orange County (Signature Financial Group, Inc., et al, (“Signature”) v. Mayer Hoffman McCann, P.C., et al). This lawsuit arises out of a review of the financial statements of Medical Capital Holdings, Inc. (“Medical Capital”) by Mayer Hoffman. In June 2009, Medical Capital was sued by the SEC and a receiver was appointed to liquidate Medical Capital. The plaintiffs in the Signature lawsuit are financial advisors that sold Medical Capital investments to their clients. Those plaintiffs were sued by their clients for losses related to Medical Capital and now seek to recover damages from the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman of approximately $87 million for the losses and expenses they incurred in litigation with their respective clients and for lost profits. The Signature lawsuit seeks to impose auditor-type liabilities upon the CBIZ Parties for attest services they did not conduct. Specific claims asserted and relief requested included fraud, intentional misrepresentation and concealment; negligent misrepresentation; equitable indemnity; declaratory relief and respondeat superior. In November 2013, the Court granted the CBIZ Parties motion for summary judgment and the CBIZ Parties were dismissed from the lawsuit. The Company has been advised by Mayer Hoffman that it denies all allegations of wrongdoing made against it and that it intends to continue vigorously defending the matter. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the above matters or estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any. Although the proceedings are subject to uncertainties inherent in the litigation process and the ultimate disposition of these proceedings is not presently determinable, management believes that the allegations are without merit and that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company. In addition to those items disclosed above, the Company is, from time to time, subject to claims and suits arising in the ordinary course of business. Although the ultimate disposition of such proceedings is not presently determinable, management does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company.

X
- Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration