Client Alerts, News Articles & Blog Posts

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

U.S. Supreme Court Reed Decision: Direct Impacts on Local Sign Regulation

Speaking at today’s Northeast Ohio Law Directors Association monthly meeting, Robert A. Hager, member of the firm Brennan, Manna & Diamond in Akron, will be participating on a panel of experts presenting and analyzing the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, wherein the Court struck down as unconstitutional under the First Amendment the Town’s sign ordinance based on it not being content neutral and, therefore, not surviving strict scrutiny under the Court’s test for non-content neutral regulations. This decision will have major impacts upon local sign ordinances. As part of the panel discussion, Mr. Hager, who represents the City in Wagner v. Garfield Heights, a recent political sign case where the City prevailed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit and a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court remanded the case back to the 6th Circuit after the Reed decision for reconsideration by the 6th Circuit in light of the Reed, will be addressing the ruling and its affects going forward.

Today’s meeting is being held at the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, One Cleveland Center, 1375 East 9th Street, Floor 2, Cleveland, Ohio.

For more information about the panel discussion, please contact Robert Hager at rahager@bmdllc.com.

CLIENT ALERT: HB 159 - Regulatory Indemnity Provisions in Public Works Design Contracts

Representative Louis W. Blessing III (R-Colerain Township) recently introduced HB 159 to regulate the use of indemnity provisions in professional design contracts related to public improvements. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to prohibit public agencies from requiring design professionals to indemnify them from claims which are not attributable to negligent or other wrongful conduct on the part of the design professional.

CLIENT ALERT: Construction Law Update: Communication is Key! And Other Lessons Learned From A Recent Public Project Court Decision

In a recent decision, the Ohio Court of Claims entered a $2.2 million judgment in favor of the general trades contractor, and against a public university, in connection with an on-campus renovation project. Mid American Construction, LLC v. Univ. of Akron, Ct. of Cl. No. 2016-00685JD, 2018-Ohio-4513.

CLIENT ALERT: Ohio Incentivizes Cybersecurity Measures

On November 2, 2018, Ohio’s Data Protection Act (“DPA”) went into effect. The DPA incentivizes Ohio businesses to proactively address cybersecurity and data protection by providing an affirmative defense/safe harbor for claims related to data breach. However, the safe harbor is only applicable if the organization can prove “reasonable compliance” to the DPA.

CLIENT ALERT: Update on Discrimination

The “#metoo” presence and the recent Kavanaugh confirmation hearings have brought sexual discrimination issues to the forefront of the American mind. Always an incendiary and confusing topic, it also includes various permutations of issues involving sex, sex stereotyping, sexual orientation, and transgender situations.

CLIENT ALERT: Ohio Supreme Court Rules that a Subcontractor's Construction Defects are Not a Covered "Occurrence" Under a CGL Policy

Although a growing number of states have held that CGL policies provide coverage for damages caused by the defective work of subcontractors, the Ohio Supreme Court has refused to join the national trend. In Ohio N. Univ. v. Charles Constr. Servs., Inc., 2018-Ohio-4057, the Ohio Supreme Court recently ruled that a subcontractor’s faulty workmanship is not a covered “occurrence” under a typical CGL policy.