Our thanks go to Union Township for adding this identifying sign to the Ivy Pointe Commerce Park today. We have made a commitment to Union Township, and they have made a commitment to us!
The Finney Law Firm prides itself on our aggressive stance in countering the actions of bureaucratic bullies through claims resulting not just in a victory in the administrative battle being fought, but also in recovering monetary damages, attorneys fees and injunctive relief against those very bureaucrats.
However, because of abstention under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), and its progeny (that has been significantly scaled back by a the recent Supreme Court decision in Sprint Communications, Inc. v. Jacobs, 571 U.S. __, 134 S.Ct. 584 (2013)) and other principles of administrative law and comity, it is a bit of a challenge of how to “turn the tables” on government actors and bring a challenge under 42 USC Section 1983 concurrent with the administrative proceeding.
We had such a case in 2012. There, our client was being disciplined by the Ohio Elections Commission in a proceeding we were certain was unconstitutional violation of her free speech rights.
First, we raised First Amendment defenses before the agency. They were simply deaf to such arguments. Then, when filing our Section 119 administrative appeal in Franklin County Common Pleas Court, we appended a claim for declaratory and injunctive relief under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution as allowed by 42 USC Section 1983.
And, of course, to level the playing field against an agency who had the full resources of state govermment against her, such claims include the right to have the client’s attorneys fees reimbursed by the State if the Plaintiff prevails.
In Magda v. Ohio Elections Commission, Franklin County Common Pleas Court Case No. 12-CVH 10-13674, the state opposed that Complaint saying that state law did not tolerate a Section 1983 challenge to accompany an administrative appeal. The trial court disagreed, and Judge Mark Serrott wrote this decision allowing the challenge to proceed arm-in-arm with the Chapter 119 appeal.
Judge Serrott later granted the State’s Motion for Summary Judgment, denying both our administrative appeal and the Section 1983 challenge to the statute. That decision was appealed to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. Interestingly, the State at that level did not renew their challenge to the Section 1983 claim accompanying the Chapter 119 appeal. Thus, the issue proceeded with both claims before the appeals court.
In the end, the Court of Appeals overturned the trial court decision and granted summary judgment to our client on both the administrative appeal and the constitutuonal claims. Thus, Plaintiff won a permanent injunciton against the enforcement of the statute and reimbursement of the full measure of her attorneys fees dating back to the initiation of the action before the agency under the constitutional claim.
So, yes, a constitutuional challenge (or any claim challenging the authority of the legislature to enact the offending law or the agency to enforce the same in the manner that it has), can be brought along with a Chapter 119 administrative appeal.
This vigorous and creative response to a prosecution by bureaucrats raging out of control in Columbus is a prime example of how the attorneys at the FInney Law Firm succeed in “making a difference” for our clients.
Let us know how we can solve your business and bureaucratic challenges.
On Friday, the Cincinnati Enquirer and USA Today wrote about our case, NorCal Tea Party v. IRS, the only nationally-certified class action challenging the IRS’ and Lois Lerner’s targeting of Tea Party groups for extraordinary review in their non-profit applications.
The new development in that long-running case is that Lois Lerner and her chief lieutenant, Holly Paz, seek to have their deposition testimony sealed, and indeed all pleadings relating to the sealing sealed as well. (You will remember that Lois Lerner pled the 5th before Congress and refused to testify about the scandal, and her role therein.) Indeed, Judge Barrett has ordered a sealed hearing on those motions for this Friday. You may read all about that here.
Well, today, the Gannett GP Media, Inc., the parent company of USA Today and the Cincinnati Enquirer, filed a motion to intervene in the case for the purpose of forcing open the pleadings, the deposition transcripts and the hearing.
Read about that here.
The Enquirer’s Motion is here and their tendered Memorandum in Opposition to the Lerner/Paz motions is here.
In our firm’s relentless pursuit of public interest law, we consider this issue, and this case, to be among the most consequential matters we have addressed.
As attorneys, especially in a smaller city like Cincinnati, we can be tempted to trust one another, especially experienced real estate practitioners as to the timing of recording of instruments. But that trust can be misplaced, as many times between the “closing” and “recording” things go awry.
Roundtable closings
In Ohio, particularly southwest Ohio and for residential properties, round-table closings are common. For clients from other parts of the country, this can seem like a quaint (and legally dangerous) custom.
The buyer, seller, lender, and Realtors all gather in a room with a title agent to sign and exchange documents and funds. This ceremony is a “closing” and there occurs the formal payment of the purchase price, funding of the loan and the delivery of the deed.
Escrowed closings
This can differ from closings more common in other parts of the country where the seller places in escrow the deed, the buyer places in escrow the note and mortgage and the lender and buyer pay the sums to the escrow agent. (Escrowed closings are not unheard of in the Cincinnati marketplace, especially for commercial transaction or corporate executives whose schedule will not allow them to attend a closing in person.)
In this setting, the title agent holds both the escrowed funds from the buyer and the lender, and the deed and mortgage for recording. Then, he records the instruments and checks the title to assure that “all is clear” before disbursing funds.
The “gap”
Thus, with an escrowed closing, there is no “gap” between funding the recording. The funds are not released until after recording and title updating showing no intervening liens or deeds.
However, with a roundtable closing, the funds are released to the seller at the closing table, and the deed and mortgage may not be recorded for hours or days. In the meantime, in theory if not in practice, a deed, easement, mortgage or involuntary lien (such as a tax lien, a judgment lien or a mechanics lien) could be recorded against the real estate.
Since Ohio is a largely race/notice state as to the order of recordation of instruments (whoever records first without actual notice of someone else’s interest in the property “wins” the contest for priority), the later-recorded deed or mortgage would lose priority to an instrument intervening beforehand.
This is a large potential risk in terms of losing value for the buyer or lender. The total value of the real estate can be lost as a result of such a priority issue.
This timeframe between closing (or the last title update) and the recordation of the title instruments is known in the real estate industry as the “gap.”
Insuring the gap
So, the issue for a buyer should be: Who is taking the risk for the gap? It goes without saying that a seller delivering a warranty deed is promising to deliver good title to the buyer. But what if the seller is a crook, bankrupt, deceased or simply un-findable after the closing?
Well, (a) if a buyer purchases an owner’s policy of title insurance, (b) specifically requests that the title company insure the “gap,” and (c) that “gap” coverage is issued at the closing table, then the buyer will be protected from losses from an intervening instrument. If all three circumstance are not present, then the buyer is going to bear this risk and have claims solely against the seller for breach of warranty covenants.
Real-life experience
We recently were approached by a buyer from a round-table closing on a residential property. It took the title agent six days after the closing to record the deed. In the intervening timeframe, the seller gave a deed to a second buyer. (Sure, this was entirely fraudulent conduct by the seller, but nothing should surprise us anymore.) That second buyer’s deed went on before the deed of the first buyer. The first buyer even purchased an owner’s policy of title insurance, meaning at the closing he obtained a “commitment” for a title insurance policy. But that commitment did not contain “gap” coverage language, rather the policy was conditioned upon the instruments being recorded without loss of priority.
Conclusion
That particular matter is still in litigation, but, win or lose, this story highlights the grave risk of closing a transaction by roundtable closing, and failing to ask for and obtain affirmative “gap” coverage. This admonition applies equally in residential and commercial transactions.
Finally, this ties in with our earlier admonitions: (a) buy title insurance (Why title insurance?) and (b) Don’t just buy a title insurance policy; read the policy, on our Ivy Pointe Title blog. While it would be nice to tell clients that protecting their interest is as simple as buying an owner’s policy of title insurance, it is not. The buyer must read and understand the exceptions to coverage and also ask for “gap” coverage. Otherwise, he retains significant risks of partial or total title failure.
In our Spring 2017 newsletter, we introduce you to the paralegal team we have carefully assembled as well as provides updates in commercial leasing, labor and employment law, and medical malpractice litigation,
Read it here.
Today, former Finney Law Firm attorney (of counsel) Curt Hartman took the oath of office as a Judge on the Hamilton County Common Pleas bench. The oath was administered by Judge Melba Marsh. Judge Hartman was appointed by Governor John Kasich to the bench to fill the unexpired term of Judge Beth Myers, who last fall won a seat on the Court of Appeals.
Immediately afterwards, Judge Hartman’s parents — Carl and Barbara Hartman — formally “robed” the Judge.
Our own Chris Finney served as Master of Ceremonies.
It was a joyous occasion. Congratulations, the Honorable Curt C. Hartman!
As we have grown, the vision of the Finney Law Firm is sharpening for our clients and the public: A broad array of services offered in one firm, each practice area delivered in a quality fashion.
At our core, we are a real estate firm, with experienced transactional attorneys, a title insurance company that insures residential and commercial titles, and commercial litigators who can address virtually every aspect of disputes relating to real estate: Eviction, foreclosure, title disputes, easement disputes, construction disputes and mechanics lien claims, as well as complex real estate litigation.
Beyond that, we offer quality estate planning and probate administration and our transactional team rounds our its services with corporate formation and development, including acquisitions, dispositions and financing.
Isaac T. Heintz, Kevin J. Hopper, and Eli Krafte-Jacobs, along with paralegals Tammy Wilson and Misty L. Winkler, and Richard P. Turner at the title company, lead our transitional team day in and day out.
Our litigators are well-known for our public interest practice — handing legislative and regulatory matters aggressively, confronting government officials who would illegally interfere with their life, their business and their fortune. Three times we have ascended to the U.S. Supreme Court, and three times we won the relief we sought with 9-0 victories there. We apply this same sophistication and vigor to commercial litigation, personal injury, wrongful death and medical malpractice matters.
Bradley M. Gibson, Stephen E. Imm, Julie M. Gugino, and Casey A. Taylor along with paralegal Brandy E. Fitch are our quality litigation team.
Finally, we are proud to recently have expanded our litigation services to include labor and employment law with experienced litigator Stephen Imm.
When a client asks “do you do that,” I am proud to respond “yes, and we do it well. Let me introduce you to …..”
Let us know how we we can help with your business or personal opportunity or challenge. It is with you in mind that we have assembled this team of quality practitioners.
Finney Law Firm is a growing firm that strives to make a difference in the greater Cincinnati area through their personal and professional work. Members of this firm have extensive experience in a broad range of legal services including business formation and development, litigation, real estate, estate planning and administration, commercial dispute resolution, criminal defense, bankruptcy, and public interest law. The desire is to represent clients, hire employees, and work with vendors who share in the Firm’s key standards of Integrity, Accountability, Communication, and Excellence.
Job Overview
As a growing company with offices in Eastgate and Mt. Adams, Finney Law Firm seeks to hire an Assistant Bookkeeper to contribute to the success of the Firm. The primary functions of this position will be to assist and support the accounting and bookkeeping efforts for the Company. A desirable candidate will be able to successfully:
- Enter and record accurate financial information
- Process the Firm expenses with a detailed accounting trail
- Oversee and maintain the credits and debits of various accounts
- Manage the day to day financial transactions for multiple accounts
- Assist in managing the billing cycle by processing, reviewing, and sending out monthly invoices
- Communicate and coordinate with staff, clients, and other points of contact
- Perform additional responsibilities to assist the Bookkeeper with day to day operational needs
Required Skills and Abilities
- Strong emphasis on being detail oriented
- Ability to multi-task and work in a fast paced environment
- Willing to work individually and as part of a team
- Experience with QuickBooks and advanced Excel skills preferred
- College degree or accounting/bookkeeping experience required
How to Apply and Additional Information
Interested candidates should email a cover letter, resume, and professional references to Katherine Fox at [email protected]. A review of applications will begin immediately. This position is full time and benefits are available.
We are pleased to pass along this press release from the office of Governor John Kasich that was just posted a few minutes ago. It tells us that our very own Curt C. Hartman — “of counsel” to this firm since its inception — is being appointed to the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court.
Mr. Hartman is an extraordinary litigator. He primarily has handled this firm’s appellate practice, including convincing the United States Supreme Court three times to accept cases of this firm, and winning each 9-0. He also has handled numerous cases before the Ohio Supreme Court, Ohio’s many appellate Courts, and 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.
“We are sad to lose such a capable litigator from our ranks,” said Finney Law Firm owner Christopher P. Finney. “But we are thrilled for the people of Hamilton County to have such a capable judge on the bench. It is to the considerable credit of Governor Kasich that he recognized the talent of Curt Hartman and elevated him to this important position. Congratulations to our own Curt C. Hartman!”
Mr. Hartman will be sworn in before month’s end. Stay tuned for details of the ceremony.
Every parcel of real property in Ohio undergoes a major “reappraisal” by the County Auditor’s office every six years and then a minor “update” in the three years in the middle of that six-year cycle. Different counties in Ohio are on a different six year and three year cycle.
Below are listed the counties that went through a major “Reappraisal” in 2016 (that new value first appearing on the January 2017 tax bill) and a minor “update” in 2016 (that new value also first appearing on the January 2017 tax bill).
The other thing important about the valuation cycle is that regardless of whether another tax complaint was brought previously, every property owner has the right to challenge his property’s assessment before the Board of Revision in the new triennial.
The schedule of counties starting a new triennial this year follows:
Reappraisal Counties
Adams
Columbiana
Hancock
Hocking
Holmes
Lawrence
Meigs
Monroe
Paulding
Scioto
Tuscarawas
Washington
Update Counties
Carroll
Champaign
Clark
Fairfield
Logan
Marion
Medina
Miami
Ross
Union
Wyandot
If you’d like our assistance with a property valuation, use our secure contact page, or contact Christopher P. Finney at 513-943-6655.