Note: This is a reprint of a post published on June 17, 2019.
In Jackson, all roads lead back to Siemens and the Hemphill-M.A.C. feud is no exception. An old lawsuit may explain why Hemphill Construction is going to such lengths to gets its money from Marcus Wallace. Hemphill sued M.A.C. after Marcus Wallace withdrew $4 million from a joint checking account without the required approval from Hemphill Construction. Needless to say, Hemphill was none too pleased by the withdrawal and sued Regions as well as Mr. Wallace and M.A.C. Construction.
Siemens hired M.A.C. to serve as a "prime contractor" in July 2013. M.A.C. hired Hemphill Construction at the same time to "perform part of the work for the project." M.A.C. and Hemphill agreed to open a joint checking account. The joint checking account was opened at Regions Bank in September 2013. Regions issued a signature card that required two signatures from each company. The terms of the checking account required one signature from each company for each transaction.
Two-signature rule seems simple enough for a checking account. However, nothing is simple when it comes to the Siemens deal. The complaint states:
8. Despite this two signature requirement, Regions allowed M.A.C. to unilaterally withdraw or otherwise remove from the Account over $4,000,000.00 in direct violation of the terms of the Account Package.Hemphill accused Regions of approving the unauthorized transactions and demanded repayment. Regions refused. Regions claimed that since the bank didn't add the language to the agreement, it didn't have to honor the two-signature rule. Hemphill said oh really?
Instead, Regions ignored the requirement without prior notice to the Hemphill signatories and allowed the M.A.C. & Associates, LLC signatories to unilaterally transfer millions of dollars out of this account without requiring signatures from both M.A.C. and Hemphill in violation of the express requirements of the "Signature Card". The exact number and nature of the Bank's unauthorized transactions were also provided to you by Darin Grantham, Hemphill's CFO. But, to avoid any confusion, Hemphill contends that each and every debit to this account, whether by check, withdrawal;· wire transfer or otherwise, that was not authorized in writing by a Hemphill signature, was and is unauthorized.The lawsuit was filed in Madison County Circuit court on March 16, 2015. Regions removed the to federal court and cross-claimed M.A.C. The Gibbs Whitwell law firm represented M.A.C. Meanwhile, the enemy combatants all fired motions and memos at each other while the lawyers got rich.
Regions has caused significant damage to Hemphill, not only by failing to honor this dual signature requirement, but more importantly, by failing to advise Hemphill that it did not intend to honor the two signatory requirement despite the fact that the pre-printed Signature Card made it clear that two signatures were required and the added language simply identified the names of Hemphill's authorized signatories.
The case settled in September 2016. Judge Henry Wingate dismissed the case with prejudice a year later.
Madison County Circuit Judge Steve Ratcliff awarded a $325,000 judgment to Hemphill against M.A.C. in January. Hemphill sued M.A.C. and Mr. Wallace after it was forced to pay the insurance company for claims filed against M.A.C. on a JSU project. Judge Ratcliff approved a garnishment of M.A.C.'s fees on the North State Street project last week.
Kingfish note (3/18/2025): A Hemphill motion for summary judgment spells it out even more:
8. Despite the two-signature requirement on both the Corporate Authorization and the Account Package, Regions, between the time the Account was opened in September 2013 and the time the Account was closed in February 2015, allowed almost $4,000,000.00 in withdrawal transactions (consisting of checks, manual withdrawals and wire transfers) that contained only one signature, that of Marcus Wallace. See Complaint, Ex. “K” hereto. 9. Of these transactions which only contained Marcus Wallace’s signature, $2,297,508.42 consisted of wire transfers which occurred between the dates of February 13, 2014 and August 15, 2014..... 13. During the time the Account was open, $16,136,645.78 was deposited into the Account, mostly by Siemens via wire transfer. See Hemphill spreadsheet, Ex. “L” hereto. Also during the time the Account was open, M.A.C. failed to pay Hemphill $1,314,232.00 which was owed to Hemphill under Hemphill’s sub-subcontract with M.A.C., which amount is still owed to Hemphill by M.A.C. Hemphill sought $1,314,232 from the defendants. As stated earlier, the case settled.
10 comments:
Is Hemphill still owned by the company thatbought Roy Anderson Corp a number of years ago?
What hustlers like Marcus Wallace lack in ability and leadership they more than make up in brazen gall. You would think that after fleecing Jackson and bamboozling their way to a small fortune such characters would take their money and disappear, but not guys like this. They can't quit fleecing the suckers so now they line up to run for ....mayor. Why not, there's still money to be made.
Hemphill is still owned by the same guy that has owned it for 35 years. Has never been owned by anyone but Mr. Hemphill and for the last 35 or so years, Richard Rula.
It looks like Hemphill lost a lot of money with little being recouped. Is that right? I sure wouldn’t do business with Regions after reading this. They only wanted to honor the part of the contract that the bank wrote. Wow.
Having read it all, I'm not understanding how and why Hemphill did not prevail.
I'm no lawyer but it seems that the two-signature requirement in the CONTRACT was violated and approved by the bank. And a bank account represents a CONTRACT between the bank and the parties to the account.
11:43
I think you meant there’s still money to be fleeced(stolen)
Marcus Wallace as mayor, same as old mayor.
Thanks
Does Marcus still live in Madison?
1. What a cluster--Having to have a minority contracto holder of ZERO MEANS which takes all the cream off the top then hires a competent established company who is forced to play this game over and over again just on the hopes that the contract holder does right. Hemphill has the contract holder in an iron clad contract as best as they could not realizing that the huckster contract holder will just outright steal the money meant for the job and why shouldn't he? The very idea of forcing taxpayers to pay much more for a job so one individual can benefit because he is considered disadvantaged by a government entity needs to be examined for what it is. How long will we put up with this. These policies ensure that competent people will never get on the ladder to success--your own government now says who will be the winners and by default the losers.. They reward people with no accomplishments--makes for much less innovation and kills the spirit.
Post a Comment