Ohio House limits public-nuisance lawsuits against products in 58-36 vote

The Ohio House on May 6 passed House Bill 126, a measure that narrows the use of public-nuisance claims in lawsuits that challenge products, directing such claims to Ohio’s Product Liability Act. The bill passed 58-36 after extended floor debate.

"This is a simple separation of powers bill that codifies the ruling, regardless of the facts of Trumbull County versus Purdue Pharma," Representative Adam Matthews said, referencing the Ohio Supreme Court decision. Matthews and co-sponsor Representative Craig said the bill restores clarity by requiring product-related allegations to proceed under product-liability law rather than public-nuisance theory.

Opponents urged a no vote, saying the bill goes beyond codifying the court ruling and would make it more difficult for local governments and communities to use public-nuisance claims in large-scale harms, including the opioid epidemic. "Which side do you want to be on in that case? The people or Purdue Pharma?" Representative Isaacson asked, urging rejection of the bill. Representative Pizzoli said the measure felt like a betrayal to communities that declined settlements and were seeking remedies in court.

Sponsors and supporters argued the bill protects the rule of law and prevents creative litigation that stretches public-nuisance doctrines into product regulation. Supporters also said the measure leaves other legal avenues intact for communities harmed by contamination or pollution.

The clerk recorded 58 affirmative votes and 36 negative votes; the bill passed and was titled for enactment. Floor debate cited Trumbull County v. Purdue Pharma and the Ohio Product Liability Act repeatedly; the bill’s proponents said it aligns statutory procedure with the Supreme Court’s decision.