Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Vacating, Modifying or Correcting an Arbitration Award Under R.C. 2711.13: Three-Month Limitation Maximum; Not Guaranteed Amount of Time

Client Alert

In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that neither R.C. 2711.09 nor R.C. 2711.13 requires a court to wait three months after an arbitration award is issued before confirming the award.

R.C. 2711.13 provides that “after an award in an arbitration proceeding is made, any party to the arbitration may file a motion in the court of common pleas for an order vacating, modifying, or correcting the award.” Any such motion to vacate, modify, or correct an award “must be served upon the adverse party or his attorney within three months after the award is delivered to the parties in interest.” In BST Ohio Corporation et al. v. Wolgang, the Court held the three-month period set forth in R.C. 2711.13 is not a guaranteed time period in which to file a motion to vacate, modify, or correct an arbitration award. 2021-Ohio-1785.

The Court emphasized that in R.C. 2711.13, the General Assembly “specifically addressed the discretionary power of the trial court to stay proceedings in the interest of fairness to both parties… [and therefore] the trial court is empowered to balance the interests of the parties.” Id. Now, “the limitation period in R.C. 2711.13 as an upper limit that may be shortened by another party’s filing a pleading or motion to which a response is required.” Id.

Ultimately, if and when a party to the arbitration files to confirm the award before the expiration of the three-month period following the date of the award, “any party that wishes to oppose confirmation must, within the three-month period, respond with a motion to vacate, modify, or correct the award, on the date of or before the hearing on the application to confirm.” Id. The Court explained that “failing to do so may result in the award’s being confirmed.” Id.

For additional questions, please contact Business & Corporate Law Attorney Krista Warren at kdwarren@bmdllc.com.


No Surprises Act Update: Federal Judge Strikes Portions of the No Surprises Act

In a win for providers, a Texas federal court granted the Texas Medical Association’s (TMA) motion for summary judgment and struck down portions of a federal rule that establishes a reimbursement rate arbitration process between payors and providers under the No Surprises Act (NSA).

Ohio Modernizes and Improves its Laws Governing Limited Liability Companies

Effective Feb. 11, 2022, the Ohio Revised Limited Liability Company Act (“Revised Act”) now governs all limited liability companies formed under Ohio law. The law updates and replaces the existing LLC Act and has important implications for business owners in Ohio. Passage of the Revised Act makes Ohio one of only 16 states that permits the formation of “Series” LLCs. The legislation is intended to be one of the most progressive LLC acts in the country, but retains the terminology used in Ohio’s current LLC act.

Wondering What’s Happening with Telehealth Legislation in Ohio?

In December 2021, Governor DeWine signed into law HB 122, which will expand telehealth services in Ohio. The law takes effect in March 2022 and is in response to more patients relying on telehealth over the past two years during the height of the COVID pandemic, and more providers becoming comfortable with delivering services virtually. Telehealth is now a normalized healthcare delivery system nationwide. Beyond the safety benefits inherent in telehealth services, telehealth has made healthcare more accessible and more affordable for more people.

Ohio Loan Programs to Boost Minority-Owned Businesses

Ohio has created two new loan programs to enhance growth of minority and women owned businesses in Ohio. The Ohio 2022-2023 operating budget includes the Women’s Business Enterprise Loan Program and Ohio Micro-Loan Program.

Supreme Court Upholds CMS Vaccination Mandate for Health Care Providers

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the COVID-19 vaccine-or-test mandate for employers with more than 100 employees (the OSHA ETS) and upheld the COVID-19 vaccination mandate for employees of health care providers who receive Medicaid or Medicare funding (the CMS rule).