Today’s Cincinnati Enquirer features this story on an outstanding settlement attained for our client against the City of Cincinnati for construction defects in row of homes in Walnut Hills that it renovated and sold to homeowners.
As we reported here, this firm represented the victim of an armed assault by champion boxer Adrien Broner in his civil case.
Today, the criminal case came to trial, and Broner failed to appear.
The Judge locked him up for 30 days just for that. Read that here.
Broker is know by his nickname given to him by his parents: “The Problem.”
As we reported here, in June, after five years of dithering, the Federal Elections Commission finally rendered a fine against former Congressman Jean Schmidt and the Turkish Coalition of America in a case initiated by Finney Law Firm attorneys.
That FEC case addressed a violation of Federal Election law wherein the Turkish Coalition of America illegally funneled more than $650,000 in legal fees to Congressman Schmidt, then a sitting member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The Turkish Coalition of America is devoted to advancing the interests of the Turkish government before U.S. government officials and the media.
Last week, the FEC released more documents relating to that investigation and finding of a violation of Federal law, including a report from staff attorneys that concluded that Schmidt’s violation was willful, a conclusion that could have yielded criminal charges if adopted by the FEC.
Today, Bloomberg BNA reports on how commissioners deadlocked in reaching that conclusion, and settled on the more modest findings against Schmidt and the TCA. Read that story here.
________
This case highlights how Finney Law Firm attorneys, through creativity, patience, persistence and an aggressive approach to the practice of law could “make a difference” for our client, and for our nation.
Chris Finney appeared on 550 AM WKRC radio last week to address our new litigation against the University of Cincinnati arising from their practice of segregating male students from female students in physics labs.
We have filed suit on behalf of 19-year-old student Casey Helmicki who was subject to that discrimination, alleging that the same violates the Fourteenth amendment to the US Constitution and Title IX of the US Code, which prohibits discrimination against women in the provision of educational opportunities.
Listen here starting at 1:04 until 1:13.
You may read more about this suit here.
Today’s Washington Post carries an excellent opinion piece (here) from an attorney specializing in security clearance case. In there he dispassionately explains the dual system of justice (or perhaps a spectrum of justice) based upon the relative power of the individual accused of the security violation.
Here is the sad punchline in his op ed:
The higher-profile the individual, the less likelihood, in most circumstances, of sanctions relating to security issues. In short, current security clearance policy factors in the importance of an individual in deciding whether to revoke a security clearance.
He concludes:
The next president should overhaul the system so that there is consistency for all clearance holders, whatever their station in life.
Our own Chris Finney participated in a panel discussion today on Topics in New Construction at the Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors. Also on the panel were Mike Hoffmaster of Hoffmaster Properties and former President of the Greater Cincinnati Home Builders Association and Jeff Rosa of Sibcy Cline, Realtors. The course was designed to train lawyers and Realtors on new construction issues to better assist them in serving buyers and builders.
Thanks to Cindy Henninger and Amanda Wilson at the Board for making this happen!
Today’s New York Times provides a great tool for prospective new home buyers to ascertain “Is It Better to Rent or Buy?”
Read it here.
Article has been updated 7/7/16 at 10:08 PM to add new media links below:
Friday, the Finney Law Firm filed suit in Federal District Court to stop the policy, practice and procedure of the University of Cincinnati of systematically discriminating against female students in science labs, specifically by categorically and forcibly segregating them from male students. The teacher’s assistant who victimized our client said it this way:
“women shouldn’t be working with men in science.”
Our client is 19-year old Casey Helmicki, a double major in Neuroscience and Chemistry with hopes to attend medical school. She was victimized not only by this clueless or malevolent Teacher’s Aide, but by a University who up the chain of command refused to correct its unconstitutional and illegal policies.
She first complained to the physics professor who oversaw the class. He insisted the segregation was in fact the policy of the University. She then complained to the department head. The policy did not change. Then, the matter was reported to the Title IX office of the University. The Title IX coordinator ratified and adopted the discrimination as the official policy of the University. Finally, she hired counsel, and we complained to the General Counsel’s office at the University. They investigated and further ratified the discriminatory practices.
This suit is the only hope that young female students have at UC to change the unconstitutional and illegal practice of sex segregation in science labs.
- Read the Complaint here.
- Read the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order here.
- Read Cincinnati Enquirer article on the case here.
- Read Time Magazine’s “Motto” publication has an article on the case here.
- Watch WCPO Channel 9’s story on this case here.
We will keep you updated with each and every development in this case as it progresses.
It has taken three long years (so far), but yesterday we won two important victories before the Ohio Elections Commission on the case of Smitherman v. Cincinnatians for Jobs Now. Read about that in today’s Cincinnati Enquirer, here.
In the 2013 election, several Cincinnati Labor Unions, led by Rob Richardson, Sr., donated $300,000 to a campaign to defeat Christopher Smitherman in his election campaign. The campaign ran ads on black-targeted radio stations and distributed campaign literature in African American neighborhoods smearing Council member Christopher Smitherman’s good name.
Importantly, when the dust settled from that election, Cincinnatians for Jobs Now filed no campaign finance reports showing the source of the funds and the expenditure of the monies designed to defeat Smitherman, something that Ohio Election Law requires. This is part of what is known as a “black money” effort to influence the outcome of election campaigns.
For three years, Jonathan White, who formed Cincinnatians for Jobs Now claimed he acted alone in forming and executing the massive campaign to undermine Smitherman. Amazingly, he claims that he opened a P.O. Box, but gave no one the address. Still, magically the $300,000 checks form Richardson showed up in that P.O. Box. These lies are necessary to avoid a finding that Cincinnati for Jobs Now was running an illegal Political Action Committee by the Ohio Elections Commission.
After years of delay by the Ohio Elections Commission, yesterday saw two important developments in this case:
- Cincinnatians for Jobs Now, to avoid a worse outcome from the OEC, confessed that they in fact ran an illegal political action committee, and should have reported the sources and expenditures of their campaign funds as required by Ohio law; and
- When Rob Richardson, Sr. ignored the subpoena issued to him to provide testimony to the OEC, the OEC voted to proceed in an action to have Richardson found in contempt.
It has been expensive and time-consuming to pry these facts from those who set out to violate Ohio law on campaign finance and to end the career of a promising politician.
The case continues before the Ohio Elections Commission. We hope to have a finding that the group and individuals ran an illegal political action committee and a referral to the County Prosecutor to pursue criminal charges against the wrong-doers.
Our “win” for five special needs school children and their parents or guardians was featured in today’s Cincinnati Enquirer. Read that story here.
In 2010 and 2011, our clients were several multi-handicapped, developmentally-disabled, special needs children in Columbia Elementary School of the Kings Local School District. Most were wheelchair-bound.
A teacher in that special needs classroom told her aides she derived a “perverse pleasure” in tormenting the kids, emotionally and physically. An aide in that classroom heroically and repeatedly reported the abusive behavior to the principal and assistant principal at Kings, and they ignored those reports. Other school personnel, including the librarian, also reported the abuse to school leaders. Again, no corrective measures were taken. Amazingly, the assistant principal walked into the classroom and personally witnessed the abuse, and did nothing about it.
The teacher then went directly to the Board of Education, which adjourned into executive session to hear her report of the abuse in order to to keep the accusations secret. Finally, the teacher submitted her resignation and threatened to report the abuse to the media, and the school board acted.
Unfortunately, their actions were to take nine depositions of the witnesses to the abuse. They then paid the abusive teacher a five-figure cash award to resign, and they gave her a glowing letter of recommendation to help convince her to leave. The District never told the parents that their children were abused.
Our firm was first contacted about obtaining public records relating to the abuse. The District refused to produce the transcripts of the depositions, trying to shield the abuse from public disclosure.
The focus of the school district and their attorneys was covering up the abusive conduct, not protecting these children — and more children that might be abused by this teacher going forward at a new school.
Next, we were retained by these five parents vindicate their rights of these children who were subject to this abuse.
After two and a half years of litigation, the case has finally settled. But unfortunately, the settlement involves money only. It was not practical to force the District to effectuate changes in procedures or management as a part of that change.
That settlement was the topic of today’s Enquirer story.