The Finkel Law Firm LLC has a long history of representation in commercial litigation. Whether that commercial litigation involves, antitrust, injunctions, land use, product liability, lender liability, or collections, the Finkel Firm brings a wealth of institutional knowledge to the table for the benefit of our clients.
ANTI-TRUST
In the case of Mims v. Yarborough, 343 F.Supp. 1146 (D.C.S.C. 1971), the Finkel Firm represented the plaintiffs and obtained an injunction against public officials charged with carrying out a proposed water project. Then in the companion case, the Finkel Firm represented the plaintiffs to successfully use federal antitrust law in a commercial setting. Mims v. Kemp , 516 F.2d 21 (4th Cir. 1975). Since then, the Finkel Firm has been involved in numerous cases, representing both the Plaintiff and Defendant in litigation involved allegations of anti-trust, unfair trade practices and unfair competition.
INJUNCTIONS
Whether the injunction seeks to prevent a competitor from employing a key employee with a non-compete agreement or seeks to prevent an commercial entity from dissipating assets during the pendency of litigation, the Finkel Firm has represented both Plaintiffs and Defendants in this commercial setting. Injunctions are hard to get and hard to keep. The Finkel Firm is knowledgeable and experienced in these matters.
LENDER LIABILITY
The Finkel Firm represented Marathon Oil Company, in its $60,000,000 claim in the Hilton Head Bankruptcy. A plethora of claims were brought under the general heading of lender liability. Further, the Finkel Firm routinely defends its many financial institution clients from claims of improper servicing and lender liability. For other institutional clients, the Finkel Firm has also represented the Plaintiff in suits brought against lending institutions. It is this unique perspective of representing both the party bringing the claim as well as other parties defending against the claim that allows the Finkel Firm to serve its clients and anticipate the strategies of the opposing party as well as the ultimate outcome of the litigation to advise our clients.
LAND USE
In Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Counsel , 60 L.W. 4842 (1992), the Finkel Firm successfully challenged South Carolina’s Beach Front Management Act and required the state to pay for the impact of that statute on individual home owners and other property owners. The Finkel Firm also represents numerous agricultural business interests seeking to develop areas where there business can be constructed and grow.
PRODUCT LIABILITY
The Finkel Firm has been involved in hundreds of cases against manufacturers that placed into the stream of commerce a product that was defective. Most of these cases have been handled on an individual basis. However, over the past five years, the Finkel Firm has also brought several class actions against manufacturers and others involved in the distribution chain of defective products. Thus, the Finkel Firm’s reputation continues to grow in the area of litigation involving defective products.
COLLECTIONS
Whether collecting an account receivable in magistrate’s court (less than $7,500) or collecting on a commercial obligation in Federal District Court, the Finkel Firm has handled both the large and small, from initial demand to supplemental proceedings. Knowledge of the process from start to finish aids both client and the attorney in the effective handling of this sub-area of a legal practice. Whether it’s a landlord seeking to collect on a lease or an institutional client that loaned funds for the purchase of equipment, the Finkel Firm has brought actions in Magistrate’s court, State Circuit Court, Federal District Court, and the Bankruptcy Courts.
The Finkel Firm’s commercial litigation division applies a full service approach to their representation of a client.
