Client Alerts, News Articles & Blog Posts

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

BMD Obtains Supreme Court Victory on Behalf of Sterilite of Ohio, LLC

Columbus, Ohio – On August 26, 2020, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued its opinion in Lunsford v. Sterilite of Ohio, LLC, Slip Op. No. 2020-Ohio-4193. The Supreme Court’s 4-3 decision reversed an Ohio Court of Appeals ruling that had reinstated a putative class action against Sterilite brought by a group of current and former employees claiming that Sterilite’s use of “direct observation” urinalysis screening violated their common law right to privacy.

BMD originally obtained dismissal of the case in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, which was reversed by a decision of the Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals in August 2018. Following the Fifth District’s adverse ruling, BMD successfully petitioned the Supreme Court of Ohio to accept jurisdiction and hear the case. BMD partner Daniel Rudary argued Sterilite’s appeal to the Supreme Court on January 28, 2020.

In its decision reversing the appellate court, the Supreme Court majority adopted BMD’s argument that the plaintiff employees consented to drug testing under the “direct observation” method when they voluntarily produced urine samples while being observed by a same-sex monitor in a designated restroom facility. The Supreme Court also reaffirmed Ohio’s long standing rule of employment-at-will, holding that because “Sterilite had the legal right to terminate appellees’ employment at any time, appellees’ argument that their consent was involuntary because of their fear of termination necessarily fails.”

BMD Litigation Member John Childs and Partner Daniel Rudary represented Sterilite before the Supreme Court of Ohio. Their brief to the Supreme Court can be read here, and Attorney Rudary’s January 28, 2020 oral argument can be viewed here.

See additional coverage on the decision in the ABA Journal and Bloomberg News.

Banking & Cannabis: The Next Frontier Webinar

On Tuesday, September 21st, BMD’s own Banking and Cannabis Partner, Stephen Lenn, hosted a star-studded cast of panelists in a webinar titled Banking & Cannabis: Cannabis Lending, The Next Frontier. The webinar, which had to suspend registrations when hitting a maximum cap of 500, aimed to explore issues related to cannabis and banking, with a particular emphasis on lending. With the sponsorship and support of the Bankers Associations of Arizona, Colorado, Ohio and Utah, Steve was able to recruit an elite group of bankers, bank regulators, cannabis industry players, and cannabis regulators, who took the topic head on. The discussion kicked off with an opening from the keynote speaker, VP of Congressional Affairs for the American Bankers Association, Tanner Daniel.

Is Your Bonus System Creating Wage and Hour Violations? A Hidden Impact of the Labor Shortages

As employers struggle with attracting and retaining talent, many have turned to incentives such as Signing Bonuses and Retention Bonuses. In doing so, employers may be inadvertently exposing themselves to overtime law violations. Employers with non-exempt employees know that the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires an overtime premium to non-exempt for work in excess of 40 hours per week. However, all too often, employers miscalculate the “regular rate” of pay, which is used for calculating the “overtime rate.” The miscalculation is becoming more prevalent in today’s market when employers fail to include supplemental compensation, such as certain Signing Bonuses and Retention Bonuses into the regular rate of pay. An example: A non-exempt employee is hired at a rate of $20 per hour, and also receives a retention bonus of $1,200 after working for 12 weeks. In her 11th week of work, employee works 50 hours. In her 14th week of work, employee works 50 hours. What is her paycheck in week 11? What is her paycheck in week 14?

No Surprises Act – Notice Requirements

On July 1, 2021, the Biden Administration passed an interim final rule: Part 1 of the “Requirements Related to Surprise Billing Act,” in an attempt to curb excessive costs patients are required to pay in relation to surprise billing. The rule is set to take affect January 1, 2022, and will only affect those who are enrolled in insurance via their employers, as federal healthcare programs already prohibit this type of billing.[1]

El Contrato Escrito: La Herramienta Predilecta

No existe mejor herramienta a una disputa contractual que un documento firmado por las partes en el cual se expongan las obligaciones y acuerdos entre éstas.

New State Budget Institutes Licensure Requirement for Ohio’s Hospitals

On July 1, 2021, Governor Mike DeWine signed Ohio’s final budget codified at Ohio Revised Code 3722.01 et seq., which includes a new licensing requirement for Ohio’s hospitals. For years, Ohio was the only state in the country that did not license its hospitals. This approach will now be replaced with new, detailed requirements that will require careful review and compliance. Here are some of the highlights concerning these new changes: