No Photo

Nicole Marie Finn

1.0
Rating: 5.9

Licensed for 4 years

Lawyer at Albany, NY

677 Broadway Fl 9, Albany, NY

About Nicole

Practice Areas

This attorney has not specified their practice areas.

Fees and Rates

We have not found any cost information for this lawyer


Looking for an attorney? Avvo can help.

search module image

Search our directory

Quickly connect with top attorneys through our legal directory to get help with your legal issue.

chat module image

Avvo's live chat agents can help coordinate a consultation with a local attorney.

Chat with a live agent who can match you with the right attorney for your legal needs.

Chat with

Licenses

Licensed in New York for 4 years

State: New York

Acquired: 2021

Due to Reregister within 30 days of Birthday

No misconduct found

Location

Jackson Lewis P.C.

677 Broadway Fl 9, Albany, NY, 12207-2989

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

Nicole Marie Finn's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

1.0 /5.0

1 Client Review

Filter Avvo Reviews (1) Refine reviews to match your needs. Use the filters to quickly surface reviews that align with your case or priorities.
Star rating
5 stars 0
4 stars 0
3 stars 0
2 stars 0
1 star 1
Practice Areas

Showing 1 - 1 of 1 review

Posted by anonymous | October 17, 2022 | Hired Attorney | Discrimination

Might as well hire opposing counsel

Made mistake of retaining Solomon firm for settlement conference (SC) bc initially positive discussions with Solomon, from whom I repeatedly requested representation for case and/or settlement conference - which had been initially suggested by another attorney, whom I retained bc Solomon firm wouldn’...t actually respond either way for weeks, who would have charged hourly and allowed me to ask questions beyond SC. When NF sent SC retainer (not until the week before SC), I asked to actually speak with NF first before switching representation, but firm wouldn’t allow without executed retainer and $. With NF/AS, you need another attorney to protect you from your own attorney - I wouldn’t have hired if had realized NF had actually drafted $5k ***flat fee*** retainer just for *last-minute traipsing* into “day-long” SC (the only flat fee retainer I’ve ever personally seen/received). Another firm would have charged only $2500 retainer for hourly consumption AND wanted report of investigation and other case documents, about which NF/Solomon firm never actually cared; another even wanted to pre-read ROI before initial consult (but then got covid and couldn’t help). Not until the afternoon before SC, NF unilaterally wanted to reduce settlement demand from $75k to $15k, which was insulting. Reminding me (as a woman) of a guy who won’t take no for an answer, NF called me right before SC “to be sure we were on same page” even though I never affirmatively responded that I wanted to speak with her after it became apparent that she would simply give up all of my rights in order to “settle”. During the hour right before SC (and all the way until final “settlement agreement”), Solomon/NF started threatening to break up with me. Having my own “attorney” repeatedly threatening to break up with me made me want to ‘settle” just bc intolerable situation. But even though NF falsely claimed that she would stand up for me even though providing candid advice privately, she NEVER actually stood up for me. And refused to intervene or answer any questions beyond SC, even when I was requesting abeyance of case deadlines in order to increase chances of good-faith settlement (bc Agency intentionally had me backed up against wall). NO “opening statement” in SC. NF DID NOT CARE about my ongoing concerns about mediator treating parties differently (repeatedly refusing to intervene or advocate on my behalf, despite repeated requests), that “settlement terms” were not even consistent with laws that Agency wasn’t following in first place (mediator [herself an attorney] actually ended up advising). NF herself provided absolutely NO comment on the “final settlement agreement,” for which she asserted I would require assistance while she was repeatedly threatening to terminate after I had already burned $5k. NF’s “thank you for your cooperation” was only after I had to keep repeating myself just for her, only because she didn’t actually listen or care about anything I had said on my own behalf during previous day. NF advised me to choose between Agency’s “bad or worse” options, both of which I rejected in order to fight/assert that Agency should be willing to uphold its own word. If didn’t settle, NF/AS refused to help me, so I was stuck with either accept whatever Agency is willing to “offer” or nothing (i.e., lose-lose). Stupidly burned $5k “flat fee” only to be the ONLY ONE actually advocating for myself. Entire paltry $10k “settlement” for 3 years of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation (and chronic suicidal ideation) goes (after taxes) almost entirely to settlement “attorneys” who didn’t actually do anything. Honestly NF/AS made me feel like I might as well have hired opposing counsel. Didn’t actually care about concerns, just don’t want to hear them. The only beneficiaries of imaginary “civil rights laws” are attorneys who waste billable hours.

Nicole Finn

Replied last October 21, 2023

I was assigned to this case on the eve of the settlement conference. Following a consultation with another attorney at the firm, the client was informed were not interested in litigating the case on the merits. Notably, the client handled it pro se up until this point such that summary judgment in the agency’s favor was almost certain (we would not take a case if we didn’t believe it was worth the investment to fight). The client sought out services at another firm but reached back out when things fell through with them shortly before the conference. The client expressed a profound desire for counsel without other option. We agreed to represent them only for purposes of the conference given the anticipated futility of moving forward with the litigation. The retainer agreement was unequivocally clear that this was a flat fee arrangement, only to cover advisement over the settlement conference. We expect clients read the terms of any agreements they sign, and this was also communicated verbally before the contract was sent. Solomon Law Firm routinely litigates employment matters against federal agencies and understands what will likely result in a settlement and what will not. The client’s monetary ask was far beyond anything realistically obtainable given the facts and status of their case and if not reduced, would have almost certainly resulted in no agreement, summary judgment, and zero relief for the client. The client was repeatedly advised about the risks of settling or moving forward, and that it was their decision to make. Attorneys have the right to terminate relationships with clients under certain circumstances, and the client’s conduct throughout representation, among other factors, warranted withdrawal. While we informed the client of this, such withdrawal did not occur. Any allegations that I did not provide zealous representation was the result of the client’s own direction, for example, expressly prohibiting me from speaking and rejecting my attempted communications (calls, emails) with them both before and during the conference. In my professional opinion, there was no bias by the mediator, who was in fact very gracious in moderating discussions despite this client’s repeated failures to follow decorum. I am very passionate about helping my clients and do everything in my power to be both a competent attorney and compassionate counsel for the hardest times in people’s lives. Given the state of the client’s case at the time it was picked up by Solomon, this was a good outcome. The client retained us specifically for the purpose of the settlement conference, with the goal of finalizing the matter (again, it was made very clear we were not handling the litigation if settlement was not reached). It is also worth noting that not only did I represent this client before and during the all day conference, but I also continued to advise them for several weeks after until the agreement was finalized, all under the same flat fee arrangement (such that if this was an hourly file, their fees would have exceeded the $5,000 paid). While I am sympathetic to the client’s position, I must disagree with their depiction of events.

See All Client Reviews

Nicole Marie Finn's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Nicole

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't received any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't created any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

Experience

Rating:  5.9 (Average)

Education

N/A

Albany Law School

Avvo Rating

Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.

What determines Avvo Rating?
  • Experience & background Years licensed, work experience, education
  • Legal community recognition Peer endorsements, associations, awards
  • Legal thought leadership Publications, speaking engagements
  • Discipline Disciplinary information may not be comprehensive, or updated. We recommend that you always check a lawyer's disciplinary status with their respective state bar association before hiring them.
Avvo Rating Levels
10.0 - 9.0 Superb8.9 - 8.0 Excellent7.9 - 7.0 Very Good6.9 - 6.0 Good5.9 - 5.0 Average4.9 - 4.0 Concern3.9 - 3.0 Caution2.9 - 2.0 Strong Caution1.9 - 1.0 Extreme Caution