In a news release yesterday, Ohio Attorney General David Yost warned creditors that CARES Act checks are protected by Ohio state law.

“The stimulus checks were intended to be used during an emergency – to put food on the table, keep the lights on, and a roof over our heads,” Yost said. “It wasn’t meant to pay off an old bill.”

The law to which Yost is referring is Ohio Revised Code Section 2329.66 which exempts property from “execution, garnishment, attachment, or sale to satisfy a judgment or order” under certain circumstances including:

A payment in compensation for loss of future earnings of the person or an individual of whom the person is or was a dependent, to the extent reasonably necessary for the support of the debtor and any of the debtor’s dependents.

ORC Section 2329.66(A)(12)(d).

Ohio Attorney General Yost also posted a NOTICE OF APPLICAPBILITY OF STATE LAW EXEMPTION TO PAYMENTS UNDER THE FEDERAL CARES ACT on his website, which can be found here.  According to the Notice:

The payments under the CARES Act are in the nature of emergency support, designed to support basic needs of tens of millions of Americans. This is why debts owed to the Federal and State governments are not being withheld from the payments. Although there is no explicit exemption for CARES Act payments under federal law, Ohio law protects them.

In his notice, Yost indicates that the State of Ohio is reserving the right to enforce this state law against creditors who try to collect against these CARES Act checks.

Watch our blog for more updates, and feel free to contact Rebecca L. Simpson (513.797.2856) for more information.

Introduction

You may want to a use trusts for a multitude of reasons, including, but not limited to, avoiding probate, maintaining control of assets after death, and tax minimization. One of the more crucial reasons for you to use a trust is to allow for flexible property management.  The use of a trust to manage property is prudent when there are laws and regulations in place that limit the ownership, sale, and transfers of that property. This holds especially true when dealing with firearms. This post will discuss (a) some of the issues that the use of firearm trusts may address; (b) the relevant laws and regulations surrounding firearms; (c) what a firearm trust is; and (d) recommendations for planning for an estate that includes firearms.

What Issues Can Firearm Trusts Address?

Probate administration is an invasive process where the court makes much of your family’s private information public.  The types and values of the guns subject to probate administration are part of the public record.  Furthermore, if your firearms are part of the probate estate, then the parties receiving the firearms will be reflected in the public.  Often, this information is available online.  If you create a firearm trust, you can avoid the specifics of your firearm collection from becoming public knowledge and the recipients of the same.

Control of your firearms after death may be important considering the felonious implications of certain criminals and non-citizens possessing certain firearms. Those implications may make it difficult for you to legally transfer certain firearms to your heirs and beneficiaries, particularly when you do not know everything about their pasts. By creating a firearm trust, you can address that uncertainty.

In that same vein, under the current laws and regulations surrounding firearms, you may avoid certain regulatory requirements for the transfer of firearms at your death by putting your firearms into a firearm trust. For example, a transfer tax associated with the transfer of certain firearms may be avoided.

Generally, outright possession of a firearm limits possession to single individuals. However, if you create a firearm trust, one of the many results is flexibility of ownership. For example, if you name multiple co-trustees to the firearm trust, then those co-trustees may each enjoy the use of the firearms in the firearm trust. By knowing the laws and regulations, a competent estate planner should be able to take advantage of the many benefits provided by firearm trusts.

What Are the Laws and Regulations Surrounding Firearms?

There are many laws and regulations regarding firearms in the United States.  Generally, in accordance with the principles of federalism, states pass their own laws and regulations regarding firearms.  However, the federal government has its own firearm laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, the Gun Control Act of 1968 (the “GCA”); the National Firearms Action of 1934 (the “NFA”); and the various regulations implemented by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (the “ATF”).

Congress passed the GCA in response to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.  The GCA is composed of Title I and Title II.  Title I of the GCA addresses most firearms in the United States, including shotguns, rifles, and handguns.  Despite being under the GCA, Title I Firearms are not largely regulated by the federal government, unless those Title I Firearms enter interstate commerce.

The federal government’s abilities to regulate Title I Firearms in interstate commerce are addressed in Bezet v. United States, 714 F. App’x 336 (5th Cir. 2017). The Bezet Court found that the federal government may regulate, through the Commerce Clause, the importation of certain firearms and ammunition, and the use of certain imported parts in the assembling of firearms.  Furthermore, in Bezet, the GCA withstood intermediate scrutiny because Congress enacted the provision of issues with the important government objective of “buttress[ing] states’ individual efforts to curb crime and violence” through a “comprehensive national response.”  Using the same logic, the Bezet Court found that the federal government did not infringe on any Second Amendment rights because the law did not completely prevent consumers from obtaining firearms. The consumers merely had to overcome certain hurdles.  So, while the GCA may not impose many federal restrictions on firearms, it still has teeth.

Title II of the GCA “revises and incorporates provisions of the original NFA,” which Congress passed, under the Taxing Powers, in response to the organized criminal activity of the early twentieth century.  In its original form, the NFA governed the possession and sale of certain firearms and taxed the manufacturing and sale of said firearms.  The firearms regulated under the NFA were, and still are, accounted for under Title II of the GCA.  Consequently, the firearms that fall under Title II of the GCA (i.e., machine guns, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, suppressors, and other destructive devices) have been deemed “Title II Firearms.”

The original NFA regulations on the manufacturing and transferring of Title II Firearms included requirements like (a) filing an application with the ATF; (b) paying a $200 stamp tax; (c) providing fingerprints; (d) providing photographs; (e) undergoing background checks; and (f) seeking approval from a Chief Law Enforcement Officer (“CLEO”).  Some of these original regulations did not apply to trusts, so estate planners and their clients started using the “Firearm Trust Loophole” as means to circumvent some of the NFA’s regulations. For example, estate planners and their clients used firearm trusts to bypass the fingerprinting and CLEO approval requirements. In lieu of those regulatory requirements, the ATF tasked the federal government with the job of verifying and investigating applications. The abuse of the Firearm Trust Loophole came to a head in 2013 to 2014, where trustees and officers of other entities filed over 160,000 Title II Firearm applications, none of which were subject to the close scrutiny imposed on individuals by the ATF.  In response to this, The ATF closed the Firearm Trust Loophole by implementing Rule 41F, in 2016.

The ATF does many things regarding the federal regulation of firearms.  For example, the ATF provides guidance as to which types of firearms will fall under the NFA.  Likewise, the ATF helps to enforce various federal firearm regulations. However, one of the more critical roles of the ATF is to create federal firearm regulation through notice and comment rulemaking, as seen with Rule 41F.

The ATF’s reasoning for Rule 41F was “to ensure that the identification and background check requirements apply equally to individuals, trusts, and legal entities who apply to make or receive NFA firearms.”  In that spirit, Rule 41F changed the NFA in multiple ways.  Rule 41F added the term “Responsible Persons” to broadly encompass entities that were not covered under the original NFA. Responsible Persons specifically refers to partnerships, associations, companies, corporations, and trusts.  Furthermore, Rule 41F did away with the requirement that a CLEO had to sign off on the manufacture and acquisition of Title II Firearms.  However, Rule 41F did not entirely remove CLEOs from the picture, in that Responsible Persons, who are attempting to transfer Title II Firearms, must forward an application to a CLEO in the Responsible Persons’ domicile.  In addition to those changes, the ATF created Section 479.90a of Rule 41F to regulate the unplanned possession and distribution of Title II Firearms at the owner’s death.

What is a Firearm Trust?

A firearm trust is just what it sounds like, a trust used to legally transfer and possess firearms, and avoid regulatory requirements to that effect.  Firearm trusts can be used to ensure privacy, create situations where multiple beneficiaries may use the trust firearms, and ensure that firearms do not fall into the wrong hands.  Despite their continued utility, firearm trusts were once special compared to other trusts in that they were considered separate entities from the trustees and the beneficiaries. However, this became less true when the ATF passed Rule 41F.

Currently, trusts are bound by the regulatory requirements regarding the acquisition, ownership, and transfer of Title II Firearms. That being the case, it is important, now more than ever, for your estate planner to understand the relevant firearm laws and regulations that may surround your firearms, and how to draft an estate plan accordingly.

How Should Your Estate Planner Draft a Trust for Your Firearms?

Because of the laws and regulations surrounding firearms, there are certain things you should consider when creating a firearm trust, including, but not limited to, the type of trust, the language in the trust, the trustees and their powers, and the beneficiaries of the trust.

Regarding the type of trust used, you should consider creating a revocable inter vivos trust. Regarding the firearm trust language, your estate planner should use terms that reference the specific firearms you own and the applicable federal and state firearm laws and regulations. Likewise, the estate planner should use language that makes clear your intent to comply with said laws and regulations. To allow for the most utility, the language of the firearm trust should ensure that the firearm trust is a stand-alone trust, not one incorporated by another trust.

Regarding naming a trustee for the firearm trust, as with any other trust, there are factors to consider.  First, if dealing with a revocable inter vivos trust, you should consider naming yourself as a trustee, or co-trustee, which would allow you to benefit from the use of the trust firearms during your lifetime. Second, the trustee and the successors should be individuals who are legally capable of owning firearms (i.e., non-felons and citizens who have not renounced their citizenship).  Third, you and your estate planner should consider the possibility that a trustee, who is eligible at the time the estate planner drafts your firearm trust, may later become ineligible. To remedy that issue, your estate planner should draft a provision that outlines the appropriate course of action to deal with said situation.  Those provisions might take the form of treating an ineligible successor trustee as predeceasing a successor trustee, or a trust protector provision that allows an individual to elect eligible successor trustees.

Regarding the trustee’s powers, you and your estate planner should grant the trustee broad powers.  The broad powers should ensure that the trustee can fill out the requisite transfer forms, be reimbursed for costs that the trustee incurs while owning and transferring firearms, and have discretion regarding if, and when, the trustee must transfer firearms to beneficiaries.

Regarding naming beneficiaries, you should name eligible beneficiaries. Likewise, you and your estate planner should come up with an alternate plan of disposition to address situations where a beneficiary might later become ineligible to legally own certain firearms.  That may be done by providing a charitable remainder to certain entities that can possess and dispose of the firearms correctly.  Alternatively, you could decide to leave the firearms in further trust for other beneficiaries or dissolve the trust and distribute the firearms outright.

 

Conclusion

The creation of a firearm trust is a responsible thing for you to do. However, if you do not plan for the disposition of your firearms, the executor of your estate is not going to be entirely without direction. The ATF created Section 479.90a of Rule 41F to guide executors of estates through the disposition of Title II firearms in unplanned estates.

Section 479.90a provides that an executor of an estate may possess a decedent’s registered firearms but must apply to transfer the firearms to the decedent’s heirs before the close of probate.  In said application, the executor must, among other things, name the estate as the transferor and sign on behalf of the decedent. To avoid having to deal with uncertainty and regulatory red tape associated with unplanned estates and Section 479.90a, please feel free to contact the Finney Law Firm.

Please contact Isaac Heintz (513.943.6654) or Jennings Kleeman (513.797.2858) to discuss your estate planning needs.

 

 

Jane Schulte

There have been numerous articles written about Remote Online Notarization (or RON) in the past few months, surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic, and the real estate industry’s need to perform work digitally to ensure that sales, purchases and refinances can occur during the social distancing orders currently in place.

However, there has been some confusion surrounding terminology and differences in digital closings, and we are writing this article is to provide some clarity.

E-closing

An e-Closing or electronic closing is a mortgage closing in which all the documents are created, accessed, presented, signed, notarized and recorded electronically. They remain in their digital form and nothing is printed out. An e-Closing is conducted with the signor(s) and Notary in each other’s physical presence, thus not accomplishing the objective of full separation of the notary/closer and the parties.

Hybrid closing

A hybrid closing is the same as an e-Closing except that the Promissory Note is papered out and wet-signed (sometimes along with the mortgage), so again the procedure does not accomplish the objective of physical separation.

Remote Online Notarization (RON)

A RON closing, on the other hand, uses an e-Notary to perform notarial acts when the signor is not in the same physical location as the notary.  The signor appears before an e-Notary in a live, recorded two-way audio/visual conference where identification is verified with a photo ID along with knowledge-based authentication technology.  A platform such as DocVerify, provides a tamper-evident seal and uses encryption and multi-layered security to prevent fraud.

Conclusion

Ivy Pointe Title is pleased to announce that it has an in-house e-Notary to provide these services for cash, lender and refinance real estate transactions.  Craig Donohoe, our in-house closer, is now able to perform RON closings for any lender, realtor, borrower or seller who would like the opportunity to sign their documents in the comfort of their homes or businesses, not only to avoid social contact at this time, but also in the future for convenience, speed and efficiency that has not previously existed in our industry.  We also have a second dedicated outside e-notary, Ted Dahmus, who is committed to priority e-closings for Ivy Pointe Title.

For more information on how to place your RON title and closing order, please contact Rick Turner (513.943.5660).

 

This morning, Finney Law Firm attorney Rebecca L. Simpson appeared live with anchor Angenette Levy on Local 12 to discuss the latest developments with the Paycheck Protection Program.

You may watch the link here.

Attorney Rebecca L. Simpson has been our point person inside Finney Law Firm to research and keep updated on the PPP and to advise clients on the intricacies of how to access Paycheck Protection Program funds for their small businesses each step of the way.  She has already led three webinars on the topic, with two more to come this week.

Contact Rebecca L. Simpson (513-797-2856) for assistance with the program.

Attorney Rebecca L. Simpson
On Friday, April 17, at 9:30 AM, Finney Law Firm Attorney Rebecca L. Simpson will present “Powerful Assistance to Realtors under the Paycheck Protection Act” (“PPP”) to Realtor and affiliate members of the Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors. This special program is free to members and nonmembers.
  • Ms. Simpson has already conducted an extensive webinar on the PPP to EmpowerU. To date for live participants and those watching the recorded webcast (here) that message has reached more than 1,000 viewers. That webinar was primarily aimed at Part #1 of PPP, which dealt with employers with W-2 employees.
  • This program on the other hand primarily is aimed Part #2 of the PPP that just launched today (April 10, 2020):  1099 contractors, self-employed, sole proprietors (for example, real estate investors whose companies have no employees). Ms. Simpson also will explore the various situations of Realtor “Teams” with 1099 contractors and W-2 employees within the teams, part-time Realtors who may also have separate W-2 jobs, and other variables specific to Realtors.
CABR Members can log in to register here and nonmembers can register here. This program is free for both members and nonmembers.
Contact Christy Beaver (513.842.3011) at the CABR for questions about the program and registration.
Contact Christopher P. Finney (513.943.6655) or Rebecca L. Simpson (513.797.2856) for specific assistance for you or your company.
A detailed description of the PPP program is here.

I spoke with two clients last night, one who applied with First National Bank of Lebanon (only $25,000 in loan amount) and one who worked through Heritage Bank (based out of Northern Kentucky) who obtained $745,000.

So, the SBA is not messing around. As promised, these loan funds are being pushed immediately into the economy.

Stay tuned for more updates, and free free to contact Rebecca L. Simpson (513.797.6227) for more information.

As our clients have noted from six years and a half years of our work to “Make a Difference,” Finney Law Firm  is actively working to assure that our attorneys are constantly up to date on developments in the law, and then impart that information to clients and the public with blog entries, e-newsletters, seminars, webinars and media appearances.

Our performance during the COVID-19 crisis has met and exceeded that standard.  And, because our clients hunger for information to help them to weather this unprecedented storm, the response has been overwhelming.

Here is our performance by the numbers since the beginning of March:

  • 28 COVID-related blog entries with critical legal updates for clients, including information on the PPP and EIDL programs from the SBA.
  • Those blog entries have had more than 6,300 “reads” since the crisis began.
  • 6 major Constant Contact e-mail blasts with important COVID-19 legal developments.
  • More than 13,250 “opens” of those emailed newsletters, a record number in one month.  We are seeing that the information is so valuable that there are a record number of “forwards” from clients to their contacts with our information, and those “forwards” are opening and reading the communications as well.
  • We have had 8 major TV and radio appearances relating to COVID-19 issues.
  • We have gotten calls from all over the nation for help on the PPP program from the SBA.
  • We have done or will do 4 webinars on the PPP program. Between the webinar live attendees and those watching the recordings, we will have reached more than 1,000 participants.
  • We have retained exclusive relationships with 1 Ohio e-notary and 1 Kentucky e-notary to become one of the first title companies to be able to do entirely electronic, remote closings over the internet through Ivy Pointe Title.

All of this is designed to assure we are as effective as we can be in serving you, by understanding the law, which is developing daily, by developing the contacts to achieve your objectives, and by imparting that knowledge in a usable format so you can implement to win on legal and economic battlefields that are daily emerging.

I congratulate and thank our team — lawyers, paralegals and staff — for contributing to this area of service to our clients.  And thank our clients — existing and new — for recognizing this sophisticated and cutting-edge approach to the practice of law for their benefit.

Let me know personally how the Finney Law Firm can help you to weather this storm.  My email is Chris@FinneyLawFirm.Com and my phone numbers are 513.943.6655 (o) and 513.720.2996 (c).

Finney Law Firm attorney Bradley M. Gibson

Litigation attorneys perform much of their work outside the courthouse. There is law to research, documents to review, and motions to write – all of which can be completed remotely with the right technology. But sooner or later, litigation makes it way to the courthouse for a motion hearing or a trial. As the COVID-19 pandemic spreads across the country, trials have been postponed, depositions canceled, and discovery deadlines ignored. What are we – and our clients – to do while the nation weather’s the storm inside our homes?

New legislation on litigation deadlines

Fortunately, the legislature and judiciary have reacted quickly to the developing pandemic and provided much needed guidance. On March 27, 2020, Governor DeWine signed H.B. 197 into law, effectively tolling all statutes of limitations and other deadlines under Ohio law until the state of emergency is lifted or July 30, 2020 – whichever comes sooner.

How do the extensions work?

Statutes of limitation prevent a litigant from having her claims heard in court if she files her case beyond the statutory deadline. In Ohio, for example, an individual has one year from the date of discovering a medical malpractice claim to file a lawsuit. If the would-be-plaintiff files after the expiration of the one-year-period, her case will be dismissed no matter how compelling or meritorious it may appear.

So, how do the new tolling provisions impact our hypothetical med-mal plaintiff? Let’s assume she discovered the malpractice on May 9, 2019. She would then have until May 9, 2020 to file her lawsuit. H.B. 197 now tolls the deadline, retroactive to March 9, 2020 when Governor DeWine issued the state of emergency. Let’s assume the state of emergency is lifted on June 1, 2020. In that case, none of the days between March 9, 2020 and June 1, 2020 will count against our plaintiff. She had two months remaining to file her case when the state of emergency was issued, and she continues to have two months to file from the date the order is lifted. In this scenario, our plaintiff has until August 1, 2020 to file her case.

Changes to Civil and Local Rules affect deadlines

But, in addition to statutory deadlines imposed by the state legislature, the practice of litigation is governed by a litany of deadlines imposed by the judiciary. The Rules of Civil Procedure allow defendants 28 days in which to file a response to a complaint. Local county courts have rules that establish how long a litigant has to file a response to a motion. Each judge sets a calendar order for each case, specifying when discovery is to be completed, dispositive motions are to be filed, experts are to be identified, and when trial is to take place. The list goes on.

To address these issues, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued its own order on March 27, 2020 which tolls the time requirements set forth in all rules promulgated by the State’s high court. The Supreme Court’s Order also applies retroactively to March 9, 2020. Thus, if a defendant’s response to a complaint was due on March 16, 2020, that response will now be due one week after the Court’s Order expires.

What’s happening in practice?

Trial court judges and attorneys are also working to address specific issues on a case-by-case basis. For instance, some in-person hearings can be handled on conference calls, allowing the parties to advance the case where practical. But if your case involves a health care provider, or an entity crippled by the pandemic, the case will likely be put on hold for the duration of the fight.

Technology advantage

In my practice alone, I have had two trials, three mediations, and several depositions all postponed indefinitely. Fortunately, the Finney Law Firm has invested significant resources in technology over the last few years which has allowed us to adapt our practice to meet the needs of our clients while working remotely. We are leveraging cloud-based technology to review and edit documents, obtain electronic signatures, and host video conferences with our clients and colleagues. We can conduct depositions remotely, using videoconferencing technology, when opposing counsel and the particular circumstances of the case allow.

Conclusion

If your case can be advanced in this time, we have the means and wherewithal to do so. Hopefully, sooner than later, we will be able to passionately advocate for our clients in the courts. Until then we are committed to helping our clients navigate the pandemic, and their cases, in these trying times.

Attorney Matthew S. Okiishi

On April 6, 2020, the Department of Labor published its temporary rules for the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”). Our firm has written prior entries regarding the FFCRA and Covid-19’s impact on the workplace, and I previously noted that a significant portion of the FFCRA would require additional federal guidance to understand. The rules define qualifying reasons for leave, employer and employee notice obligations, and the small business exemption.

Key Definitions

Under the new rules, a “Child Care Provider” is a provider who receives compensation for providing child care services on a regular basis and is licensed under state law. However, a Child Care Provider does not need to be compensated or licensed if they are a family member or friend who “regularly cares for the employee’s child.”

“Place of Care” means the physical location where care is provided for the Employee’s child while the employee works for the employer.

“Son or Daughter” includes biological, adopted, and foster children. It also includes stepchildren, legal wards, or the child of a person standing in loco parentis. Son or Daughter can also include persons over the age of 18 when that person is incapable of self-care because of a mental or physical disability.

“Subject to a quarantine or isolation order” includes the “shelter in place” or other general orders issued by states and municipalities in response to the Covid-19 epidemic, and includes when a governmental authority has advised certain categories of citizens to shelter in place.

Application to Emergency FMLA Leave

The qualifying reason for Emergency FMLA leave is narrow, applying only to employees who are unable to work or telework due to the need to care for a Son or Daughter if the child’s school or Place of Care is closed or the Child Care Provider is unavailable due to the Covid-19 pandemic. But as stated previously, the definition of a “Child Care Provider” is quite broad, including family members and other persons who regularly care for a child out of a neighborly or familial bond. Similarly, a “Son or Daughter” includes the full spectrum of children and persons who are regularly under the care of a parent. As such, it would be improper for an employer to deny EFMLA leave to an employee because the child is not necessarily a biological relative or the Child Care Provider is not a licensed day care.

Paid Sick Leave Implications

The six reasons for paid sick leave have also been impacted by the new regulations:

1. Subject to a federal, state or local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19.

Employees are only considered to be “subject to a quarantine or isolation order” when, but for being subject to the order, they would be able to perform work that is otherwise allowed by their employer. When the order shuts down the employer’s operations, an employee is not entitled to paid sick leave.

2. Advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to COVID-19 concerns.

A health care provider has advised self-quarantine only when the advice is based on a belief that the employee (1) has Covid-19; may have Covid-19, or the employee is particularly vulnerable to Covid-19 and (2) this advice prevents the employee from being able to work at the employer’s workplace or through telework.

3. Experiencing COVID-19 symptoms and seeking medical diagnosis.

The employee must be experiencing a fever, dry cough, shortness of breath, or any other recognized Covid-19 symptom from the CDC, and must be seeking a medical diagnosis. Paid sick leave under this reason is limited to the time the employee is unable to work because of their affirmative steps to obtain the diagnosis.

4. Caring for an individual subject to a federal, state or local quarantine or isolation order or advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to COVID-19 concerns.

“Individual” is an immediate family member, person who regularly resides in the employee’s home, or a similar person with whom the employee has a relationship that creates an expectation that the employee would care for them. Employees may only take leave under this reason if, but for a need to care for the individual, the Employee would be able to perform work for their employer at the workplace or through telework.

5. Caring for the employee’s child if the child’s school or place of care is closed or the child’s care provider is unavailable due to public health emergency; or

Subject to the same EFMLA definitions, an employee may only utilize this reason if no other suitable person is available to care for the Son or Daughter during the period of such leave.

6. Experiencing any other substantially similar condition specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Labor.

At the time of this posting, it does not appear that HHS has provided other “substantially similar conditions.”

Intermittent leave and Notice

Employees may only take intermittent leave under the FFRCA’s Emergency FMLA or paid sick leave provisions when the employer agrees. However, an employer may be required to grant “intermittent” leave when an employee is actively seeking a medical diagnosis, as doctor’s visits typically require employees to leave their worksite or telework desk.

Because of the rapid development of Covid-19 symptoms and an employee’s need for leave, the Department of Labor is not requiring employees to notify employers about their need for emergency FMLA or paid sick leave as soon as practicable. Instead, the Department generally advises employers to be proactive in notifying employees of the failure to give notice and an opportunity to provide documentation prior to denying the request for leave. Notice may only be required after the first workday where the employee takes EFMLA or paid sick leave.

From a content perspective, it is reasonable for an employer to require enough information to determine whether the requested leave is covered. This documentation is generally limited to: (1) the employee’s name; (2) dates for which leave is requested; (3) qualifying reason; and (4) a statement (oral or written) that the employee is unable to work because of the qualified reason for leave. For specific reasons, such as quarantine, doctor’s orders, or care for a child, additional documentation may be required. Employers are also permitted to seek information that is needed to support tax credits pursuant to the FFCRA.

Small Business Exemption

Employers with less than 50 employees may be exempt from providing paid sick leave or emergency FMLA leave when the imposition of such requirements would “jeopardize the viability of the business as a going concern.” An employer is entitled to this exemption when an authorized officer has determined that:

  1. The leave requested would result in the business’s expenses and financial obligations exceeding available business revenues and cause the small business to cease operating at a minimal capacity;
  2. The absence of the employee or employees requesting leave would entail a substantial risk to the financial health or operational capabilities of the business because of their specialized skills, knowledge of the business or responsibilities; or
  3. There are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, and qualified, and who will be available at the time and place needed, to perform the labor or services by the employee or employees requesting leave and these labor or services are needed for the small business to operate at a minimal capacity.

Small businesses must document an exemption determination internally and maintain the records in its files.

Conclusion

The FFRCA has changed the way business is done in this country, albeit on a temporary basis (The FFRCA sunsets on December 31, 2020). In approaching requests for leave, the law and regulations contemplate that employers will engage in a thoughtful and well-documented manner and avoid knee-jerk reactions or blanket assertions of “business viability.” Employers of all sizes would be well-served to engage competent legal counsel to assist in navigating the FFRCA’s new requirements.

The Finney Law Firm’s labor and employment attorneys are well-versed in the rights and obligations of both employers and employees, including the rapidly evolving COVID-19 changes. For assistance with these matters, consult  Matthew S. Okiishi (513.943.6659) and Stephen E. Imm (513.943.5678).

Attorney Isaac T. Heintz

Interest in estate planning grows

The COVID-19 crisis is prompting an increasing number of people to take care of their estate plan, including reviewing and updating their existing estate plan to comply with their current wishes.  We are seeing an increased number of people thinking about having an estate plan in place in the event something should happen to them.

What does a basic estate plan include?

Estate planning can be simple or can be complex, especially during a fast moving and potentially deadly pandemic.  At a minimum, it is recommended that each individual should have:

  • A basic Last Will and Testament,
  • A general durable Power of Attorney, and
  • Health care directives (i.e., Health Care Power of Attorney and Living Will).

By having these minimal estate planning tools in place, the Last Will and Testament will direct the individual’s wishes for the disposition of his or her assets in the event of death.  The general durable Power of Attorney allows a chosen individual to make financial decisions.  The health care directives provide the individual’s wishes for medical treatment, and designate certain chosen people to make health care decisions on their behalf, and receive health care information from their physicians.

The additional option of a trust

If an individual is looking to avoid probate of assets upon his or her death, the establishment of a Trust is a beneficial tool for this purpose. Not only does a Trust instrument allow for the disposition of assets upon the death of an individual, it avoids the necessity for probate, and is effective in reducing probate administration expenses, such as attorney’s fees, fiduciary fees, and court costs.

Social distancing and safe execution of documents 

Finney Law Firm, LLC is practicing a safe signing environment at both of our offices, and is working with estate planning clients to arrange for signing of estate planning documents at the client’s residence upon request.

Conclusion

The experienced estate planning team at Finney Law Firm, LLC is available to assist with implementing an estate plan, and reviewing and/or amending an existing estate plan.

Our goal is to continue to fulfill the estate planning needs of our clients during this crisis.

Contact Tammy Wilson (513.943.6663) or Isaac T. Heintz (513.943.6654) for your estate planning needs.