Practice Areas & Industries: Fineman Krekstein & Harris, P.C.


Group Profile Lawyers in this Group Offices Locations for this Group

Practice/Industry Group Overview

Fineman, Krekstein & Harris defends lenders and professional service providers against consumer claims, ranging from the Truth in Lending Act, Real Estate Settlement Practices Act and Home Owner Equity Protection Act on the federal side, to Pennsylvania’s Home Improvement Finance Act, Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law and common law claims on the state side.  We represent mortgage lenders, mortgage brokers, appraisers, inspectors among others in federal and state courts.

Representative Matters

  • Fineman Krekstein & Harris attorneys represented a major secondary mortgage lender which was sued for violation of the Truth in Lending Act. In addition to seeking compensation for violations of the statute, plaintiff also requested a jury trial. Fineman Krekstein & Harris attorneys filed a motion arguing that plaintiff was not entitled to a jury trial because of the arbitration clause contained in the mortgage note. Shortly after the Judge granted Fineman Krekstein & Harris ' motion, the case was favorably resolved.
  • The firm successfully opposed class action certification by a group of homeowners bringing claims against various lenders and professionals, included the appraiser represented by Fineman, Krekstein & Harris. 
  • The firm successfully defended TILA and related claims against a mortgage broker, when after discovery and depositions going to the heart of the case, the case for settled for a nominal sum.
  • The firm successfully defended claims against a home inspector, when the firm revealed through discovery that the claims were based defects not subject to the home inspection, and the case for settled for a nominal sum.

Articles Authored by Lawyers at this office:

District Court Reaffirms its Refusal to Find a Fiduciary Duty Between Surety and Policyholder (Western District)
, November 13, 2013
In Reginella Constr. Co. v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of Am., the District Court refused to reopen its judgment dismissing plaintiff’s fiduciary-in-fact, tortious interference, and bad faith claims.

Reversing on Breach of Contract Claims in the Insured’s Favor, Third Circuit Still Affirms Summary Judgment on Bad Faith Count for Failure to Meet Evidentiary Burden of Clear and Convincing Evidence, and that Suggestions from Expert Reports Alone are Not Sufficient to Establish Bad Faith Claim (Third Circuit)
, November 13, 2013
In U.S. Fire. Ins. Co. v. Kelman Bottles, the insured brought suit against its insurers for breach of contract after its claims for damages resulting from a glass melting furnace blow-up in its factory were denied. Defendant produces glass bottles, requiring it to store approximately 220 tons of...