Hi, How Can We Help You?

Author Archives: Christopher P. Finney

Image of Christopher Finney sitting on his desk, black suit, pink tie and polka dot pocket square

Hemmer Wessels and McMurtry PLLC combines with Finney Law Firm, broadening commercial practice (and new partners!)

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

We issued this press release today on this important development for Finney Law Firm: 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Christopher P. Finney, Esq.

513-943-6655

Chris@FinneyLawFirm.com

Finney Law Firm, LLC and Hemmer Wessels McMurtry PLLC announce combination under the Finney Law Firm banner

 ~ Combined firm creates strong Cincinnati-area commercial law firm on both sides of the Ohio River ~

[Cincinnati, Ohio, December 2025] – The law firms of Hemmer Wessels McMurtry PLLC (HWM) and Finney Law Firm, LLC (FLF) have agreed to combine, with an effective date of January 1, 2026.

The new firm will retain the name Finney Law Firm, LLC and will expand on the success of both firms with a more powerful Cincinnati-area presence: 21 attorneys focusing on commercial transactions and litigation, with particular strengths in Real Estate, Employment Law, Defamation Law, and Constitutional Litigation.

The announcement follows agreement by both firms to meld their mature and accomplished practices with a now-broader geographic footprint. The firm is uniquely positioned to serve corporate and individual clients from innovative startups to established and successful businesses of all sizes.

Christopher Finney will serve as President of the firm, while Carlo Wessels and Todd McMurtry of HWM and Stephen Imm, Bradley Gibson, and Isaac Heintz of FLF will be named partners. The firm will also welcome Donald Hemmer as an Of Counsel Attorney and Scott Thomas as Senior Counsel.

“This combination is a momentous step for both firms, bringing together top-notch commercial and real estate transactional attorneys, with nationally recognized litigators in Employment Law, Defamation Law and Constitutional Law,” said Christopher Finney.  “HWM’s attorneys share our commitment to ‘making a difference’ for our clients and our communities, with a focus on delivering creative legal services with determination.  This, combined with our respectful culture, where each employee is empowered to reach their professional potential and personal goals, exemplifies the focus of our firm.”

Carlo Wessels added, “The combination of the two firms advances the historic mission of the members of Hemmer Wessels and McMurtry to deliver quality, reliable and breakthrough legal services for our clients on both sides of the river.  With the newly expanded firm, clients will gain access to a broader array of many of Cincinnati’s best attorneys bringing to the table enthusiasm for the law, each with deep experience and accomplishment.”

The combination will take effect on January 1, 2026, with client services and legal operations integrated immediately. A broader brand integration, including visual branding, website updates, and expanded public communications, will roll out in phases with a formal rebrand and full public launch planned for March 2026.

The combined firm will keep each of its three offices: Eastgate, Downtown Cincinnati, and Ft. Mitchell.

About Hemmer Wessels and McMurtry PLLC
Headquartered in Ft. Mitchell, KY, with a strong presence on both sides of the Ohio River, HWM has historically maintained a formidable transactional practice anchored by Donald Hemmer and Carlo Wessels.  Todd McMurtry has complemented that corporate practice with his superior litigation team that has become, among other accomplishments, nationally preeminent in Defamation Law.  Todd McMurtry also currently serves as president of the Kentucky Bar Association.  HWM will onboard eight attorneys to the combined firm.

About Finney Law Firm, LLC

Founded in 2014, FLF has grown to 15 attorneys located in offices in Eastgate and downtown Cincinnati with five major practice areas: Corporate Law, Real Estate Law, Employment Law, Commercial Litigation and Public Interest and Constitutional Litigation.  FLF has the unique claim to three 9-0 victories at the United States Supreme Court for its public interest practice along with breakthrough class action work.

FLF also has an affiliated title insurance company, Ivy Pointe Title, LLC, that closes and insures nearly a thousand commercial and residential real estate transactions annually.

For more information about Finney Law Firm, visit finneylawfirm.com.

Media Contact: Mickey McClanahan; mickey@finneylawfirm.isoc.net; 513.797.2850.

White keyboard with page stating "Indemnity" at the top

Indemnity hell

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

First, we have cautioned our readers previously about signing contracts with indemnity promises (see here, here, and here ).  They can be open-ended free and open access to your checkbook.  Avoid — like the plague — making promises relating to “indemnify” “defend” and “hold harmless.”

Second, contracts that require you to pay the other’s attorneys fees in the event of a dispute under a contract are a form of indemnity, and many times the drafter wants to make that fee-shifting provision one-sided: If the other party prevails, you have to pay their fees, but if you prevail they don’t have to pay yours. How is that fair?

But something more sinister that, after nearly 40 years of practice, that I am now seeing is this:

Customer shall indemnify, defend, and hold Seller harmless from and against any Losses that arise from or relate to any allegation of facts that, if true, would constitute a breach of Customer’s representations, warranties, or obligations under this Agreement.

and this:

Purchaser agrees to indemnify and defend, covenant not to sue, and hold harmless Seller for (a) performance of Purchaser(s)’s obligations under the Contract Documents or (b) breach of this Agreement by the Purchaser.

These are two separate provisions in two contracts I recently reviewed for clients.  They left me scratching my head.

For the first one, if the other party merely claims (and the claims could be untrue) that my client breached the contract (“facts that, if true, would constitute a breach of Customer’s representations, warranties, or obligations under this Agreement”), then we have to pay their attorneys fees and our own attorneys fees, win or lose for either of us.

In the second one, they were asking my client to pay their attorneys fees if my client failed to perform under the contract.  Essentially, it is one-sided fee shifting, my client has to pay the seller’s attorneys fees (presumably if he prevails), but it is not reciprocal.

Now as to the first example (true, real-life drafting), it is mind blowing.  If there is a suit over the contract, and my client is 100% right, my client still has to pay his own attorneys fees and the seller’s attorneys fees, win or lose.

Now, naturally, one would say that “certainly such a contract provision is not enforceable.”  But that’s not true (or may not be true).

Not that the single largest investment bank in the nation is entitled to any sympathy at all, but in a major fail on the due diligence side, J.P. Morgan Chase purchased a FinTech company called Frank.  Frank offered college students an on-line portal to help with financial aid.  Jamie Diamond, JP Morgan CEO,  was smitten with the company and decided to purchase it to provide access to young depositors and borrowers at the beginning of their banking relationships.  Frank founder and CEO, Charlie Javice, was able to pump up the purchase price by filling her supposed customer database with millions of fake customers (some twelve times their legitimate database size).  In its due diligence process — where JP Morgan Chase had access to the best of the best — the geniuses at JP Morgan Chase somehow failed to detect the fraud before it coughed up a whopping $175 million.

But — unbelievably — to compound its error, JP Morgan Chase’s lawyers, in the Asset Purchase Agreement, agreed to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Frank and Charlie Javice personally for all claims relating to the purchase.

A court found that that promise, first, extended to civil claims (including claims for fraud) brought by JP Morgan Chase against Charlie Javice — it had to pay her attorney fees for the civil suit in which Charlie Javice was found liable for $287 million to JP Morgan Chase.

But then to compound the insult to JP Morgan Chase and its truly terrible attorneys, JP Morgan Chase also had to pay the attorneys fees of Charlie Javice for the defense of criminal charges against her, even though she ultimately was found guilty of criminal fraud.

The final tally of the lawyer fees and expenses for both cases: $115 million!

From this Fortune magazine article: “To put the $115 million figure in perspective, a high-priced lawyer billing $2,000 an hour would have to bill eight hours every day, including weekends and holidays, for nearly 20 years to reach that total.”

So, yeah, be careful when signing an agreement calling for you to “indemnify, defend and hold harmless” the other party, including for their own breach of contract and fraud.  Be forewarned and be very careful.

Epic, ouch!

Pillars of Strength: Another tip for asset protection, corporate segregation

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

For corporate executives and investors, I encourage them to look past their pursuit of the “upside” of their business (essentially, buying low and selling high), to also carefully protect their “downsides,” both predictable and seemingly out-of-the-blue unexpected liabilities: an employee or tenant or customer personal injury, a class-action lawsuit, a theft of funds resulting in insolvency, or just a change of fortunes in our dynamic economy and regulatory and tariff environment.

In this blog entry, we explore three tips as you are forming and operating your business to cover your downside: (a) good practices, (b) good insurance and (c) a corporate form.  In these two blog entries (here and here), we address how to operate that corporate form to maximize the value of the “corporate veil” protection.

And one of broad strokes in those articles is preventing liability from passing through to shareholders (in corporation) or members (in limited liability companies) personally.  The idea is that liability stays within the corporate form, and personal assets are isolated from rapacious lawyers and plaintiffs.

However, if you as a company owner or investor have all of your eggs in a single “corporate” basket, even if these strategies work, everything in that basket could possibly be lost in that catastrophic lawsuit (outside of or beyond insurance coverages).

This next idea is: Further segregate your assets into separate baskets.

  • If you have a manufacturing or service corporation, would it make sense that separate “divisions” of your company have entirely separate corporate forms, so that a catastrophic liability in one operation does not sink the entire ship that you have invested your entire career to build.
  • And more commonly, for real estate developers and investors with multiple properties, does it make sense to either make a new LLC for each individual large project, or — if you have many small investment properties — to form separate LLCs to hold and operate smaller baskets of those assets?  Many times it does.
  • And certainly for both asset protection purposes and tax purposes, it typically is wise to separate the ownership of an building occupied by the operating company, from the operating company itself.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys seeking a big payday under their lawsuit will still try to avoid these various corporate forms, by piercing the veil of one to seek the personal assets of the company owners (which would include the LLC ownership interest in multiple LLCs), but that step of piercing the veil is extremely difficult.  Segregating separate real estate assets and operating companies into their own LLC or corporation may help you weather the storm of that “out-of-the-blue” unexpected occurrence, legal or financial.

For help with the corporate structure of your assets, contact any of Isaac Heintz (513.943.6654), Eli Krafte-Jacobs (513.797.2853), Casey Jones (513.943.5673) or Ashley Duckworth (513.797.2864).

 

 

 

It’s more than just the money: Tips and traps on settlements

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

So, it many times goes like this: Litigating is either threatened and immediately settled or litigation is protracted, and the parties agree upon a dollar number for settlement of the dispute.  They apparently agree.  And then a form of settlement agreement or release is circulated, and one party or the other says: “Wooah, I didn’t agree to those terms.  I just agreed to a release of my claims for the money.”

The touchstone is: A settlement is a settlement.  And, yes parties and attorneys can be unreasonable and rapacious, using the last details to queer what folks previously thought was a settlement of a dispute, or to leverage even more money for their client.

If you orally or via email, in person or thorough your attorney, agree to settle a claim in exchange for money, that agreement to settle in itself can be enforceable.  Moreover, the party objecting to the additional language arguably can go into Court and ask the Judge to enforce that specific settlement, not another settlement with “proforma” or “typical” other provisions.

Don’t reasonable” and “customary” terms apply in filling in the “other terms” of the settlement?  Well, yes, no and maybe.

The key question is a meeting of the minds on all material terms of the settlement.  By not addressing these “other” issues at the time of the initial settlement discussions, you may leave those details to the discretion of the Court.  (And note that the Court can assess attorney fees against the defaulting party [the party not complying with the claimed settlement].  This can get expensive.)

Many of our clients are used to negotiations relating to real estate, and, yes, the law generally requires those agreements to be in writing and signed to be enforceable.  But most settlement agreements do not need to be in writing or signed to be enforceable.  All that is needed is a meeting of the minds of the parties to the agreement with all material terms being addressed and agreed.  Indeed, settlement of litigation (or perhaps even a non-litigation dispute) relating to real estate likely can be effectuated in an oral settlement agreement.

Soooo…

As one engages in settlement discussions, one must carefully consider the other material terms one wants to be addressed in the settlement at the time of those discussions.  Here is a partial checklist to consider:

  • What claims are we in fact settling?
    • Only the claims in the demand letter or present litigation, or
    • All claims from the Plaintiff?
    • Is the defendant waiving all of his claims as well?
    • What about claims unknown at the time of the settlement?
  • Assignment of rights intellectual property (software, logos and other art, plans and drawings).
  • Confidentiality.
  • No posting on social media.
  • No release to the media or other public statements.
  • Non-disparagement.
  • Court costs.

In addition to these sort of “dangling” details, the underlying litigation could address substantive issues such as title to real property, ownership of a business, theft of trust funds, and so on.  This short checklist is just the sort of thing litigants (and their attorneys) may not initially think to address in settlement negotiations.

Because of this “hair trigger” impact of an oral agreement, this firm frequently recommends the use of a “We Can Talk” Agreement requiring, among other things, that an agreement be in writing and signed in order to be enforceable.  Such an agreement precedent to settlement talks should be enforceable to prevent premature settlement arising from informal conversations.

Finney Law Firm professionals are here to help you resolve your personal and business disputes, including properly negotiating and documenting a settlement agreement.

 

Finney Law Firm welcomes our law clerk Peyton Urich

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

We are pleased to have with Finney Law Firm for his second year in law school as a law clerk, Peyton R. Urich.  We got to know Peyton from his work over the 2025 summer, and asked him to stay part-time while he is in law school.

Over the years, our annual clerkship program has allowed us to get to know law clerks, a proving ground for new associates, and for them to get to know us and our client base.  It is a challenge for them and us to expose them to the legal world, our clients, opposing counsel and the Courts, but over the years it also has been a richly rewarding experience.

Peyton is an East Tennessee native and currently a 2L at Salmon P. Chase College of Law. He started his undergraduate studies as a Biology major focusing on the pre-med track before finding his way to law where he has developed a strong interest in both civil litigation and transactional work. Outside of school, he enjoys being active in the gym and outdoors. He is also a car enthusiast who enjoys both the mechanics as well as the drive.

Join us in welcoming new talent and a fresh and enthusiastic new addition to Finney Law Firm!

Open Courts: Finney Law Firm sues to open records of criminal charges in downtown brawl

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

On Thursday, Finney Law Firm client Eugene Utz sued Pavan Parikh, the Hamilton County Clerk of Courts, and today will be filing a separate suit against the City of Cincinnati directly at the Ohio Supreme Court — both as original actions, as is permitted and appropriate — to open the records of the criminal proceedings against Alex Tchervinski, the claimed-to-be victim of the July 26, 2025 4th street brawl in downtown Cincinnati that has gained intense and sustained international media and political attention.

A cornerstone of our justice system — in Ohio and throughout the nation — is that all legal proceedings (with the exceptions [each for obvious reasons] of juvenile court and national security issues) is openness and transparency in legal proceedings.  This means that pleadings, hearings, trials and appellate work are all immediately open to public viewing and scrutiny.  This is not a hard concept to understand.

The opposite is a “Star Chamber,” named for a former English court (c. 1485–1641) known for its use of arbitrary and unfair methods.  This term has been used to describe any tribunal that acts with a similar lack of due process, which is utterly abusive of our our established standards for the American administration of justice.

Notwithstanding that, our Cincinnati administrators and our County Clerk of Courts — with no authority and no order of the Court — have on their own decided to seal the records of the criminal charges against Alex Tchervinski, the claimed-to-be victim of the July 26, 2025 4th street brawl that has gained national attention.  No representative of the media and no member of the public can see the criminal charges or any other filings in the Tchervinski criminal case.  (But they can see the court records of the six black defendants of involved in the melee.  How does this make any sense?)  At this stage, no Judge has even ruled (which ruling would be improper) to seal such records.  We hear secondhand that the defendant does not even know the charges against him.

All of Constitutional principles of due process and free speech (i.e., access to the public and press to comment and report on Court proceedings), Ohio’s public records law and the Rules of Superintendence of the Courts promulgated by the Ohio Supreme Court require these records to be made public.  But yet, the City Solicitor and the Hamilton County Clerk of Courts have decided to protect them from public release.

One might ask “why?” but of course we don’t know the “why” without seeing the records.  Moreover and simply amazingly, the City and the Clerk have sealed the Motion to Seal the records, so we don’t even know the argument for the sealing.  This is beyond abusive, it is simply bizarre.

Watch this blog for updates on this important case.

Read the Clerk of Courts Mandamus Complaint before the Ohio Supreme Court here: 2025_09_04_Complaint

Contact Curt Hartman (513.379.2923), Christopher Finney (513.943.6655) or Mickey McClanahan (513.797.2850) for assistance with public interest issues.

Rise of the AI-aided pro se litigant, oh boy!

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

In the law a “pro se” (Latin: “for one’s self”) litigant is someone (usually a non-attorney) representing themselves in Court.   Litigation attorneys and Judges are used to pro se civil litigants.  Some are fairly good; others are embarrassingly bad.  Judges usually bend over backwards to give them their day in Court and hear their arguments.  Usually pro se litigants just gum up the works (just like terrible attorneys), but every so often they score a victory.  Indeed, even though the United States Supreme Court grants writs of certiorari (accepts discretionary appeals) in fewer than 1% of all cases and it is one of the most competitive forums in which the most sophisticated litigation attorneys battle, a few years ago a pro se litigant obtained such a writ, the Mt. Everest climb of the litigation profession.

But, for better or worse, a new tool has now empowered pro se litigants: Artificial Intelligence that is writing the pleadings for them.  Our office is seeing something just short of an onslaught of new complaints, pleadings, motions, briefs and even notices of appeal and appellate briefs, all seemingly generated by AI for pro se litigants.

It’s a Brave New World in the Courts thanks to AI. Clients are cautioned that they will need to defend new actions and respond to motions and appeals just as those generated by counsel, competent and incompetent!

Buckle up.  It’s going to be a wild ride.

 

 

Learning a few things about real estate while developing our new offices downtown

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

Recently, the Cincinnati Business Courier was nice enough to run a photo spread of our new law firm offices and we have had hundreds of clients drive by or visit our new City-home of Finney Law Firm.  The project was more than $2 million invested in our offices and two apartments in the core of downtown Cincinnati, taking about three years to complete.

We undertook this project to invest in the City that has given so much to us, but also to deeply learn things our investor clients already know about real estate investing, financing and development, so we can share those lessons with other clients.  Here are a few things we learned:

  1. Patience is a virtue.  Things (plans, regulatory approvals, material orders and contractor work) are not going to happen overnight.
  2. Further, every project is a trade-off of three things: a) time, b) money and c) quality.  You can get two out of three, but it’s hard to get all three.
  3. You have to trust and respect your designers, architect, construction manager, contractors, materialmen, and laborers.  They know more about this business than you do.  And although I help clients address failed contractor relationships, I found the vast majority of the people I dealt with to be honest, qualified and quality-minded and very hard-working.  Indeed, they had to repeatedly push back on me (on time or money) to insist on high quality in the project execution.
  4. A lender pulled me aside as I was planning the financing of the project, and told me to avoid construction financing if at all possible.  Do it with cash.  Otherwise, the bank will be looking over your shoulder and slowing you down every step of the way.  He was right.  Avoiding that headache was key in the project’s success.  Obviously, this is not always possible, but great and unsolicited advice.
  5. The City was great to work with.  The Building Department (especially), the Historic Conservation Department, the Water Works, the Police.  At every juncture, I was awed at the cooperation and enthusiasm I received from City officials.
  6. Key incentives.  For this project, we employed key incentive packages which were incredibly valuable.
    • Cost segregation.  Again, an accountant friend told me to explore cost segregation on the project.  This is where an engineer’s study allows you to significantly accelerate deprecation on project components.  Over the years, I had heard of cost segregation studies, but I literally had no idea how incredibly valuable this approach can be, resulting in hundreds of thousands of additional early depreciation deductions.
    • Federal and State Historic tax credits.  Again, after I had purchased the building, a friend told me of state and federal historic tax credits (not deductions!).  These can pay for up to 45% of an historic project.  20% federal is more or less automatic, but the additional state credits (essentially a grant) are a competition and Cincinnati gets more than it’s fair share, so it is competitive.  We won both!
    •  City tax abatements, residential and commercial.  I had to jump thru a few hoops (cutting the building into condos and applying separately), but the City has generous (although slightly complicated) residential and commercial property tax abatement programs that every developer should get to know about.  They are readily attainable.
    • Port/Sales tax avoidance.  Our project was too small for the strategy to be effective, but another turn-key, money-saving program for County projects is to partner with the Port Authority to avoid sales taxes on all of your building components and materials.  For larger projects, it is a “must do.”

If you are embarking on a development project of your own, I am glad to share my contractor and materialmen list, the short-cuts and procedures I learned for each of project components.

 

Another win, this one in Colorado, on Free Speech (and a write up in the Volohk Conspiracy!)

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

Always topical, always timely, the Volokh Conspiracy today writes of Finney Law Firm and attorney Curt Hart’s win at a jury trial (pretty amazing thing for a First Amendment case) in Colorado Springs, Colorado.  Volokh covers it thoroughly here:  Jury Concludes Policy Banning Written Signs at School Board Meetings Was Unreasonable, Implemented in a Viewpoint-Based Way

Sincere congratulations to Curt Hartman on the big win, and for including us as co-counsel in the case.

1 2 3 … 59