Build On This!

Attorney Erin Wojno presented an update of recent case law to the Columbus Bar Association Real Property Committee. The cases include recent decisions on groundwater rights, a mobile home park's failure to provide safe drinking water, the application of landlord-tenant law to a campsite owner, and the zoning classification of a senior daycare. Click here to view a summary of these cases.

Attorney Don Leach presented a case law update to the Ohio Structural Steel and Architectural Metals Association, Inc., which included a review and analysis of some important recent decision in construction law. The cases include the Ohio Supreme Court's decision affirming the continued validity of the Economic Loss Rule in Corporex Dev. & Constr. Mgmt., Inc., fka Corporex Constructors, Inc.; Dublin Suites, Inc. v. Shook, Inc. (2005), 106 Ohio St.3d 412. Other recent decisions concern the application of a "no damages for delay clause," the application of Ohio's Prompt Payment Act, and the remedies available when a subcontractor submits false lien waiver affidavits. Click here for the full update.

The Second District Court of Appeals has held that a municipality may not use its power of eminent domain to appropriate land in excess of what is needed for the purpose stated in the ordinance authorizing the appropriation.

In a potentially landmark decision, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, in Committee for a Better Twin Rivers v. Twin Rivers Homeowners’ Association, No. A-4047-03T2, found that a private homeowners' association had to meet state constitutional standards with respect to the protection of its members' right to free speech. The general rule throughout the country had been that owners were bound by the community's recorded restrictions and, as a result, gave up certain rights they would otherwise enjoy. In this case, however, the Court found the owners had a right to free speech, even within the deed-restricted community, stating "[e]xpressive exercises, especially those bearing upon real and legitimate community issues, should not be silenced or subject to undue limitation because of changes in residential arrangements, such as where lifestyle issues are governed or administered by community associations in addition to being regulated by governmental entities."

The First District Court of Appeals has upheld a trial court's admission of expert testimony concerning the "visibility" value of property taken by eminent domain. In Norwood v. Burton (2005), 164 Ohio App. 3d 136, the court held that the testimony of signage expert Dr. R. James Claus was properly admitted to establish that the value of the owner's property greatly exceeded the value established by a "cost approach" appraisal. Because the property was located accross from a major shopping center, the jury could properly consider all the facts contributing to the property's value, including its high visibility.