Christopher P. Finney

Christopher Finney is the owner of Finney Law Firm, which was established in 2013, and grew organically over the past thirteen years to a firm with 25 attorneys and 13 support staff.  His practice is concentrated in the areas of commercial real estate as well as public interest law.  Chris is also the owner of Ivy Pointe Title, which focuses on residential and commercial real estate title and closing services.

The height of Chris’ legal career was reached with three wins before the United States Supreme Court two in June of 2014 and one in June of 2015.  The two 2014 wins were for clients suing the Ohio Elections Commission over their administration of the Ohio “False Claims” statute, empowering a panel of bureaucrats to judge the truth or falsity of statements made during election campaigns. He challenged the statute, and the criminal penalties attendant thereto, in a series of cases spanning five years. After losing the issue before three separate District Court judges, and all fifteen Judges on the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (an 0-18 losing record on this issue), Chris won back-to-back 9-0 decisions on the cases from the US Supreme Court.  These wins included an exciting oral argument (by hired outside counsel) before the High Court. The third US Supreme Court victory was the following year, challenging the content-based restrictions in a municipal sign code in Ohio.

Our public interest law team has also won several times before the Ohio Supreme Court, including an important win in August of 2019 dealing with Ohio’s Open Meetings statute.  The Court ruled unanimously in favor of our clients, requiring that all votes be held in public rather than by secret ballot.

The US Supreme Court wins were not the only First Amendment victories. Chris won an important victory in 1997 in the First Amendment rights case styled Kruse, et al. v. City of Cincinnati, et al., in which the City of Cincinnati’s campaign spending limits ordinance was ruled unconstitutional. In 1998, the United States Supreme Court refused to hear the case, preserving victory for Chris’ clients. It was in part as a result of this victory that he was named one of eight “Ohio Lawyers of the Year” for 1998 by Ohio Lawyer Weekly. In 2010, he also prevailed in the case of Brinkman, et al. v. Budish, et al., a landmark decision striking down Ohio’s “revolving door” statute for legislators.

Admitted to Practice:
Ohio, 1987
Kentucky, 1994
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 1988
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, 1994
U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, 1997
United States Supreme Court, 2011

Education:
Salmon P. Chase College of Law, J.D., 1987
Northern Kentucky Law Review, 1986-87
Xavier University, A.B., cum laude, 1981
University of Vienna, 1978
Covington Latin School, 1977

Memberships, Honors and Community Involvement 

Cincinnati branch of the NAACP, Executive Committee Member and Chair of the Legal Redress Commission, 2009 – 2016;

Coalition Opposed to Additional Taxes and Spending (COAST),General Counsel, 1999 – present;

 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, Board member, 2010 – present;

Drake Center, Board member,  2005-2006;

Hamilton County Tax Levy Review Committee, Board member,  1995-1997 and 2003-2006 (Chairman 2004-2006);

Hamilton County Children’s Trust Fund, Board member,  1994-1995;

Greater Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce, Member,  Local Government Committee (Chairman 1991-1992),

Hamilton County Corrections Financing Review and Strategies Commission, Member,  1989-1994

Cincinnati Bicentennial Commission, Member,  1987-1988.

2012-2015 Ohio Super Lawyer

Mr. Finney was honored as “Educator of the Year” by the Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors in 1997.

Mr. Finney was honored as “Educator of the Year” by the Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors in 1997.

Presentations and Publications

Presenter, Potter Stewart Inn of Court, 2014

 Road and Access Law in Ohio

Law of Easements: Legal Issues and Practical Considerations

Mastering Real Estate Titles and Title Insurance

Canons of Ethics

Civil Rights for Commercial Real Estate Agents

Real Estate Contacts Analysis and Comparison

How Tenants Can Solve Problems in Commercial Leases

Layman v. Binns and the Caveat Emptor Doctrine