The Ohio Department of Health has published its projections of Ohio counties’ long-term bed needs. Certificate of Need (CON) applications may be filed beginning July 1. Under the 2010 budget, the Director of Health was authorized to project which Ohio counties will have a surplus or need of nursing home beds. The counties with a surplus of beds are then identified with a maximum number of beds that can be relocated to a county having a need of beds.

The bed need rate is currently 45.8 beds per 1,000 people age 65 and greater. This rate is calculated by using the statewide occupancy rate of 82.85% in facilities that filed a Medicaid cost report in 2010.

According to this year’s projections, 20 counties have a need of over 400 beds with the top counties being Franklin, Lake, Portage, and Clermont Counties. Cuyahoga County, on the other hand, has an excess of over 2,000 beds.

For more information regarding bed needs across Ohio, visit http://www.odh.ohio.gov/odhPrograms/dspc/certn/certneed1.aspx

A commercial lease may not appear to be much different than an apartment lease, but in reality a commercial lease usually puts more of a financial burden on the commercial tenant. Here are five reasons you should have your commercial lease reviewed by an attorney:

1. Terms written in your favor. An attorney experienced in business law will review the lease and give legal advice as to what changes should be made to protect your interests. An apartment lease is usually for one year, and in most cases any repairs are done by the landlord. In a commercial lease, however, the term of the lease is at least five years with the potential to renew the term for up to 20 more years. And the landlord may try to make the repairs the responsibility of the tenant. An attorney can spot terms such as these and suggest changes in your favor.

2. Know which terms you should negotiate. A business law attorney reviews leases on a consistent basis, so he or she knows which terms should be negotiated and which terms are less important to negotiate.

3. Makes you more professional. It’s all about perception: if the landlord sees you spending time and money on an attorney for your lease, the landlord will see that you are taking the lease and your business seriously.

4. Terms are correct.  An attorney will review the lease to ensure all the terms are correct, even the seemingly small items such as dates.

5. Assistance with additional documents.  Not only can an attorney help you with the lease, but also the attorney can identify additional business documents you may need like forms, permits, licenses, and the correct legal entity to enter into the lease.

Are you now thinking maybe you should have your commercial lease reviewed by an attorney? Please give our office a call at (216) 635-0002, and our attorneys would be happy to assist you in reviewing your commercial lease to safeguard you and your business.

Under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), employers are required to allow employees 12 weeks of unpaid leave annually due to personal illnesses or immediate family issues such as pregnancy. Yesterday, in Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that state employers cannot be sued for violating the sick leave provision of the FMLA.

In 2003, the Court held in Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs that state employers could be sued for violating the FMLA provision granting employees unpaid leave relating to immediate family issues. The Court’s main concern in deciding Hibbs was preventing states from discriminating on the basis of sex. In Coleman, however, the Court found no widespread evidence of sex discrimination in the administration of sick leave. As a result, the majority found no reason to pierce states’ immunity from civil lawsuits alleging violations of the FMLA sick leave provision.

Justice Ginsburg noted in her dissent in Coleman that private employers are still subject to civil liability for violating the FMLA’s sick leave provision and that other legal remedies exist when state employers violate it.

On February 21, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision concerning states’ ability to declare arbitration agreements or clauses unenforceable. The case, Marmet Health Care Center, Inc. v. Brown et al., came to the Court from the Supreme Court of West Virginia. That court held that a clause to arbitrate all disputes in a nursing home admission agreement was not enforceable in a claim of negligence (personal injury) against the nursing home due to state public policy concerns.

Specifically, the West Virginia Supreme Court reasoned that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), which offers a presumption of enforceability for arbitration clauses, was preempted by the state’s own public policy against enforcing arbitration clauses for negligence and wrongful death claims when the party seeking arbitration is involved in providing a service that is a “practical necessity for members of the public.”

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the West Virginia Supreme Court’s rationale for denying arbitration, citing the fact that the FAA preempts a state’s arbitration policies and that this federal act includes no exception for personal injury or wrongful death claims. The Court explained that West Virginia’s public policy-rooted prohibition against enforcing arbitration clauses in these kinds of claims against a nursing home is a categorical rule. A state categorical rule that prohibits enforcement of an arbitration clause based on the nature of a claim violates the FAA.

Unlike West Virginia, Ohio has not created a categorical rule prohibiting enforcement of arbitration clauses when plaintiffs bring a personal injury or wrongful death claim against a nursing home. In fact, the Ohio legislature has enacted R.C. 2711.01(A), which provides that an arbitration agreement is enforceable unless grounds exist at law or in equity for revoking the agreement.

In Ohio, unconscionability represents the primary state common law grounds for revocation of an arbitration agreement. Ohio courts have established several guidelines for determining whether an arbitration agreement is unconscionable and thus unenforceable.
If you or your company have concerns about whether a certain arbitration agreement is enforceable, feel free to contact DLM Legal for further information at 216.635.0002 or info@dlmlegal.com.

Ohio will invest an additional $1 million for primary health-care practices to transition to a patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model of health care.

PCMH is an approach to providing health care that encourages partnerships between patients and their personal physicians. It is not a literal home, but rather a team of medical professionals working closely together for patients.  In turn, this model focuses on the consistent preventative care that promotes overall long-term good health of patients. Several benefits can be derived from this health care model including ease of making doctor’s appointments, coordination between primary care physicians and specialists, and patient education to keep patients better informed on recommended treatments.

The Ohio PCMH Education Pilot Project was created in the Substitute House Bill 198 of the 128^th General Assembly in 2010 to foster the transition of primary health-care practices into the PCMH model. The additional $1 million investment will expand the program from the original 44 primary-care practices in the bill to 50. Overall, the patient-centered medical home model aims to provide viable solutions to the current health-care system in Ohio.

Please call or email us with any questions. For more information about patient-centered medical homes, visit: http://www.odh.ohio.gov/landing/medicalhomes/pcmh.aspx