The way Ohio Public Records law is written, a member of the public aggrieved by the failure of a public agency to produce requested documents as required by law may sue that public agency for those records, and if he prevails, receive an award of attorneys fees.

Unfortunately, a pair of decisions of the Ohio Supreme Court in January of 2015 effectively gutted Ohio Public Records law by holding that attorneys fees would not be awarded if the agency produced the disputed records before the conclusion of the litigation.  You may read those decisions in State ex rel. DiFranco v. South Euclid here and here.

Thus, the Supreme Court has empowered recalcitrant public agencies to ignore and play games with public records requests.

In response, the Ohio legislature is finally grappling with the issue. As today’s Enquirer reports, Senate President Keith Faber is considering a proposal to make quicker and easier Ohio Public Records complaints through the Ohio Court of Claims.  Read about that here.

The new process contemplates resolution in 75 days or fewer.  Presently, public records cases take two years or longer to resolve through the Ohio courts.

The proposal does not reinstate the attorneys fee awards taken from members of the public by the Ohio Supreme Court, but it should make proceeding pro se more practical.

 

NOTE: the deadline to file a claim is April 13th.  Please act quickly.

The Duke Energy class action settlement has generated a record amount of traffic on our firm’s web site.  That’s a good thing, because virtually every residential and commercial customer of Duke Energy in southwest Ohio that owned property from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2008 is entitled to a refund, in some cases a significant one

We have had a few questions from clients about the settlement.  We checked and got you the answers:

  1.  If I owned a property during the relevant time period, but have since sold it, may I still file a claim?  Yes.
  2. If I can’t recall the addresses of all of the properties I owned during the claim period (we have, for example, home builder clients with multiple, rotating model homes), can I file a claim for those?  The class action attorneys are looking into this further for us, but probably not.  The claims process requires the name of the property owner and the identity of the property in question.

If you want to file a claim, log in here and follow the instructions.  It only takes a few minutes.

The deadline to file is fast approaching: April 13th.

We are excited to announce that Finney Law Firm attorneys Isaac T. Heintz and W.Z. “Dylan” Sizemore will present “Five Pillars of Success” to the Greater Cincinnati Home Builders Association on Wednesday, April 20th from 11:30 AM to 12:30 PM.

HBA members and non-members are invited, but non-members (“Future members”) must pay $25 to attend.

The seminar addresses the key steps that business owners should take in establishing and growing their businesses to maximize returns and minimize exposure to liabilities.  The presenters are knowledgeable and experienced business and real estate attorneys.

The Cincinnati Home Builders Association is a private organization of home builders and their vendors that is entrepreneurial and well-led.  They actively participate in civic matters of critical concern for the local economy and provide important educational opportunities for their members.  Finney Law Firm is proud to be a member.

A flyer with the details of the event is linked here. The location of the presentation is The Tile Shop, 3095 Disney Street Cincinnati, OH 45209.

Register online to attend this program. Reservations are required.

 

 

 

All residential and commercial users of electric generation service from Duke Energy Corp. and/or Cinergy Corp. from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2008 are eligible for a rebate under a class action effectuated in the case Williams v. Duke Energy.  For residential users, the rebate will range from $40 to $400.  For commercial users the rebate is unlimited in size.

As described to me by one of the attorneys for the Plaintiffs, the settlement — nearly $81 million in all — means “real money,” especially for larger commercial users.  Your business should not miss this opportunity, and it is even worthwhile for residential users to avail themselves of this windfall.

  • However, in order to obtain a refund, consumers must complete and submit a form on-line or on paper by April 13, 2016.

The on-line form is quick and simple.  It should take fewer than five minutes to complete.  We strongly recommend that all of our eligible clients log onto https://dukeclassaction.com and complete the form. I just did it for my own residence, and it was super-quick and super-simple.

 

We hear a lot of misinformation from prospective sellers and Realtors on when a Residential Property Disclosure Form must be used in Ohio:

  • “I’ve never lived in the house, and thus I am exempt from filling out the form.”
  • “I’m just an investor.  I don’t have to complete the form.”

Neither of these statements is true, so let’s bust these myths and in the process really dig into why a residential property disclosure form is “required” and when it is “required.”

What is the “requirement”?

As an opening proposition, Ohio law does not actually require the use of the Residential Property Disclosure statement. And by this I mean that no one is going to go to jail for failure to use the form, and the civil consequences are generally limited to termination of the contract before closing, if any.

The law in question is Ohio Revised Code Section 5302.30.  It is indeed entitled “Property disclosure form required for all residential real estate transfers.”  But when reading the statute it becomes apparent that the penalty for non compliance is: rescission of the contract, but only prior to the earlier of thirty days after the contract is signed or the date of closing (ORC § 5302.30 (K)(4)):

If a transferee of residential real property subject to this section does not receive a property disclosure form from the transferor after the transferee has submitted to the transferor or the transferor’s agent or subagent a transfer offer and has entered into a transfer agreement with respect to the property, the transferee may rescind the transfer agreement in a written, signed, and dated document that is delivered to the transferor or the transferor’s agent or subagent in accordance with division (K)(4) of this section without incurring any legal liability to the transferor because of the rescission, including, but not limited to, a civil action for specific performance of the transfer agreement.

Ohio Revised Code §5302.30 (K)(2) also provides for rescission if the seller amends the Residential Property Disclosure Form after the contract is signed.

It is always advisable to disclose

Before we get to the question of whether Ohio law requires disclosure, there is another question of whether disclosure is advisable.  The answer is almost always “of course.”

The basis of property defects fraud claims is either (a) a material misrepresentation as to a known defect (i.e., lying about the basement leaking or the presence of termites) or (b) non-disclosure of a known material defect that is not readily open to observation by a buyer.

A full and proper written disclosure inoculates a seller from both of these claims and this is advisable even if the law does not require full disclosure.

What types of transactions are covered?

Section (B)(1) of the statute tells us what types of transactions are covered by the “requirement”:

  1. transfers by sale;
  2. transfers by land installment contract;
  3. transfers by lease with option to purchase;
  4. an exchange of property; or
  5. a lease for a term of ninety-nine years and renewable forever.

Who must provide the form and who is exempt?

So, then, on to the question of who must provide the disclosure and when must it be provided:

The statute provides that it covers all “transferors ” of properties containing one to four dwelling units.  So, this would seem to include otherwise commercial properties that contain under four dwelling units, such as a bar or restaurant with apartments above.

And then the statute contains an extensive list of exemptions from its requirements detailed below, but the exemptions do include:

  • New construction;
  • Transfers from an estate; and
  • Transfers among family members and co-owners or pursuant to a divorce;

The statute does not exempt investors or simply owners who did not live in the property.

Waiver by buyer

Finally, a buyer can waive his right of rescission for a Residential Property Disclosure Form (O.R.C §5302.30 ((K)(3)(c).  And, since this is the only remedy for the failure to deliver the Residential Property Disclosure Form, it is essentially a waiver of rights of the buyer under the entire statute.

Conclusion

So, the myth is busted.  Investors and other owners who did not live in the house (except those administering an estate of a seller) are not exempt from the requirements of the statute.

Appendix

A more complete list of exemptions is below:

(1) A transfer pursuant to court order;

(2) A transfer to a mortgagee by a mortgagor by deed in lieu of foreclosure or in satisfaction of the mortgage debt;

(3) A transfer by a mortgagee, or a beneficiary under a deed of trust, who has acquired the residential real property at a sale conducted pursuant to a power of sale under a mortgage or a deed of trust or who has acquired the residential real property by a deed in lieu of foreclosure;

(4) A transfer by a fiduciary in the course of the administration of a decedent’s estate, a guardianship, a conservatorship, or a trust;

(5) A transfer from one co-owner to one or more other co-owners;

(6) transfer to immediate family members and transfers as a part of a divorce;

(7) A transfer to or from the state, a political subdivision of the state, or another governmental entity;

((8) A transfer that involves newly constructed residential real property that previously has not been inhabited;

(9) A transfer to a transferee who has occupied the property as a personal residence for one or more years immediately prior to the transfer;

(10) A transfer from a transferor who both has not occupied the property as a personal residence within one year immediately prior to the transfer and has acquired the property through inheritance or devise.

Our firm is pleased to serve as Plaintiff’s counsel in the assault case against Cincinnati Boxer Adrien Broner.

From today’s Enquirer our own Chris Finney is quoted:

“Adrien seems to have a penchant for walking around town and slugging people,” said Carson’s attorney, Chris Finney. “We want it to stop.”

Read about it in today’s Enquirer here.

The above headline — a great headline — greeted us from today’s Washington Post, for an article describing a decision issued today from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals on the case in which we are local counsel — NorCal Tea Party v. United States of America.

That case addresses the abuses at the IRS over the segregation and targeting of conservative groups for slowed consideration of their tax exemption applications, and harassment in the form of illegal and over-burdening questioning and extra reviews of their applications.  It is the only case addressing the abuses at the IRS that is still proceeding and the only case to achieve class certification status.

In that case, the Plaintiffs are seeking the spreadsheets showing the list of the targeted groups, and certain details of the extra scrutiny they endured.  Federal District Court Judge Susan J. Dlott had ordered that the IRS produce that list.  The IRS first asked her to reconsider that decision and then appealed the decision to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Today’s opinion upheld that decision of Judge Dlott.  The decision is here.

Nominally, the decision was a detailed analysis of the taxpayer confidentiality statute, 26 USC Section §6103.  But the unanimous 6th Circuit panel decision authored by Judge Kethledge, did so much more than that.

  • First, it provided a detailed recitation of the alleged abuses of the IRS in targeting and discriminating against tea party groups;
  • It also laid out a scorching criticism of the IRS and its counsel for fighting every issue in the litigation, including discovery, beyond reason.

The opinion has garnered widespread media coverage as well:

Our firm is proud to participate in this historic and important litigation.

 

.

I recently was asked by a commercial real estate salesman desiring to refer to Ivy Pointe Title: “Who is your underwriter and what is the quality of their paper?”

Who is our underwriter?

We are proud to have been accepted as an agent for First American Title Insurance Co.  We write exclusively with First American as our title underwriter.

Who is First American?  

From their web site:

  • First American is the title insurance industry’s largest single brand name;
  • First American has been issuing title insurance for more than 120 years.

What are First American’s financial strength ratings?

  • Moody’s Investors Services: A3
  • AM Best: A Excellent
  • Fitch Ratings: A

Our firm obtains great support from the underwriting staff of First American and have a high degree of confidence in the coverage they provide to our clients and customers.

 

 

The Cincinnati-area adult continuing eduction series “Empower U” is presenting this Thursday night “Property Tax Valuation Reduction” by Chris Finney.

The Finney Law Firm has handled hundreds of property tax valuation complaints in Ohio and Kentucky in the past two years.  This course instructs home and business owners how they can — on their own — lower their property taxes.

The course is this Thursday night, March 3, at 7 PM at the Empower U Studio at 225 Northland Blvd.  You may RSVP here.  Also, the course will be a “virtual seminar” that you can watch on line.   Just click here after 6:50 PM on the night of the class.

The Empower U link for the announcement is here.