Business groups back codifying Ohio Supreme Court reading of product-based public-nuisance claims into statute

Trade groups and business advocates told the Ohio House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that House Bill 126 would clarify — and codify — the Ohio Supreme Court’s interpretation that product-based public-nuisance claims must be handled under the Ohio Product Liability Act, rather than as free-standing common-law public-nuisance theories.

Tony Long of the Ohio Alliance for Civil Justice testified the bill “helps protect against misuse of public nuisance claims” and expressly aligns statutory language with the court’s holding in the national opioid litigation certified question. Kevin Shemp of the Ohio Chamber of Commerce said the measure does not create new law but “once and for all” closes a path for plaintiffs to pursue product-based public-nuisance claims that ignore ordinary causation rules and seek broadly apportioned remedies.

Proponents cited the 2005 and 2007 legislative history underlying Ohio’s product-liability framework — including Senate Bill 80 (2005) and follow-up clarifications — and said the Supreme Court’s decision should be reflected in statute so businesses and local governments do not face lengthy novel litigation each time a product-based public-health or similar claim is advanced.

Supporters acknowledged the bill narrows the availability of a public-nuisance theory for certain product-based claims and said the legislature may choose to expand public-nuisance law in other contexts if it wishes. The committee heard no opponent testimony during the proponent statements recorded at the hearing.