OSU Navigation Bar

The Ohio State University

Ohio Ag Manager

Legal Issues

Jul
06
2011

Ohio estate tax will disappear in 2013

The Ohio legislature has approved a repeal of the Ohio estate tax, but the tax will remain in effect for another 18 months.  The new law removes the Ohio estate tax obligation for any person who dies on or after January 1, 2013.  Governor Kasich signed the provision into law on June 30, 2011 as part of the state’s budget package.  The final version of the repeal differed from the language proposed earlier this year in H.B. 3, which proposed ending the estate tax as of January 1, 2011 (see our earlier post).


This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: ,
Comments Off
Estate Planning, July 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
Jun
30
2011

Legislature agrees on changes to Ohio Livestock Environmental Permitting Program

Bill establishes time limits for township and county infrastructure review

A bill approved by the Ohio General Assembly proposes limiting the amount of time county and township officials have for recommending local infrastructure needs for the operation or expansion of a Concentrated Animal Feeding Facility (CAFF).  Both the House and Senate have approved H.B. 22, sponsored by Rep. Buchy (R-77).  The bill now awaits action by Governor Kasich.

Recently introduced on May 17, 2011, H.B. 22 proposes a 75 day time limit for county commissioners and township trustees to provide final recommendations for improvements to local infrastructure that are needed to accomodate a CAFF.   Notification by the CAFF to the county and township is a required step in the Livestock Environmental Permitting Program (LEPP) permit application process.  Information on anticipated traffic routes and number and weights of vehicles must accompany the notification.  Under current law, the county and township must next provide initial recomendations to the CAFF for needed infrastructure improvements.  The CAFF may accept the recommendations or may propose an alternative, and the county and township must then render written final recommendations for infrastructure improvements.  The CAFF must submit the county and township’s final recommendations in its LEPP permit application.

Under the language agreed to by the legislature in H.B. 22, if the county or...
Read More »

This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , ,
Comments Off
July 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
Jun
27
2011

Ohio Legislature revises law for livestock running loose

New law establishes clear standards for liability, adds alpacas, llamas and bison

Livestock owners and keepers in Ohio will soon have less risk of automatic liability when their animals escape enclosures and run loose on public roadways or the property of others.   The Ohio legislature has revised the “animals running at large” law to clarify two different standards for criminal and civil liability under the law.  

Criminal liability will occur only when proven that a livestock operator behaved “recklessly” in allowing the animals to run loose.  Under Ohio law, a person behaves recklessly when he or she perversely disregards a known risk of his or her conduct, with heedless indifference to the consequences of that conduct.   For example, a livestock owner who sees but intentionally ignores a downed fence where cattle graze near a roadway could be deemed “reckless.”  

The new law establishes a different standard of liability for a civil situation.  A person may recover damages against a livestock owner if harm resulted because the livestock owner’s “negligence” caused the animals to escape.  Under Ohio law, negligence is a substantial lapse of “due care” that results in a failure to perceive or avoid a risk.  For example, a livestock owner who has not checked the line fences in a grazing area for several years could be deemed “negligent.”

...
Read More »
This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , , ,
Comments Off
July 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
Jun
16
2011

GIPSA Hog Contract Requirements

by Robert Moore, Attorney-Wright Law Co. LPA Dublin, Ohio The 2008 Farm Bill contained specific provisions that must be included in all hog production contracts. The Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) defines hog production contracts as “any growout contract or arrangement under which a person or business raises and cares for swine according to the instructions of another person”. In essence, anyone raising, feeding, or growing hogs for another person or business is subject to these provisions. Four specific provisions must be included in all hog production contracts executed after June 18, 2008. The provisions are as follows: 1. The Grower may cancel the contract within three days after signing or within some other agreed to period. The method of notice and deadline for cancellation must be specifically provided. 2. Include a disclosure statement on the first page that clearly states that additional large capital investments may be required of the grower during the term of the contract. 3. Allow growers to opt out of arbitration provisions before entering a contract. 4. The venue for a contractual dispute shall be the federal judicial district in which the contract was performed and the choice of law shall be governed by the state in which the dispute arose (unless otherwise prohibited by the law of the state in which the contract was being performed). Contracts that were executed after June 18, 2008 but do not contain the...
Read More »
No Comments
Farm Policy, July 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
Jun
06
2011

ODA Denies Egg Farm Permit as Legislation Proposes Change to Permit Program

Current bill in House would yield different outcome for Hi-Q CAFF permit

In a unique and controversial case, the Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) has denied an application under its Livestock Environmental Permitting Program for Hi-Q Egg Products, LLC to establish an egg laying facility in Union County.   In denying the application, ODA Director Zehringer followed the recommendations made in April 2011 by the ODA hearing officer who reviewed the permit application (see our earlier post).  The hearing officer had recommended denial on the basis of an incomplete application, because  Hi-Q’s application did not include a written statement from local officials certifying that final recommendations had been made for local infrastructure improvements and costs, as required by program regulations (OAC 901:10-1-02(A)(6)).  Hi-Q claimed that the county and township failed to provide the recommendations, while the county and township argued that there were no final recommendations because  Hi-Q refused to discuss an alternative transportation route.  In agreeing that the recommendations were not included in the application, Director Zehringer stated that there was “no other viable option but to deny the [permit] due to an incomplete application.” 

Ohio’s  Livestock Environmental Permitting Program (LEPP) regulates the installation and operation of  large Confined Animal Feeding Facilities (CAFFs).  Critics have long...
Read More »

This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , , , ,
Comments Off
June 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
May
20
2011

OSU to host Law Symposium on Oil and Gas

With shale development hitting Ohio at a rapid pace, OSU’s Agricultural & Resource Law Program will host our first Ohio Oil and Gas Law Symposium on Thursday, June 16, 2011.  “The New Ohio Oil and Gas Boom:  Drilling into Legal Issues,” will take place at the Longaberger Golf Club near Newark, Ohio.  The day-long educational program for attorneys will address many of the initial legal issues related to development of Ohio’s Marcellus and Utica shale resources, including these topics and speakers:

  • “An Overview of the Shale Resource” with Tom Murphy of Penn State’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research.
  • “Mandatory Pooling and Current Regulatory Issues,” by Sandra Ramos, Legal Counself for Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Mineral Resources Management
  • “Dealing with Dormant Minerals and Old Leases,” by Eric Johnson of Johnson and Johnson Law Firm, Canfield
  • “Ohio Oil and Gas Leases:  A Primer,” with Gregory Russell of Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease, LLP, Columbus
  • Landowner Leasing Issues Panel Discussion
  • “Representing Landowner Groups in Oil and Gas Leasing,” with Chris Finney of Logee, Hostetler, Stutzman and Lehman, LLC, Wooster

For more information on our Ohio Oil and Gas Law Symposium, visit https://www.regonline.com/OilandGasLaw.

This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , , , ,
Comments Off
June 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
May
03
2011

Legal Aspects of Oil, Gas Drilling Focus of June Symposium

By: Martha Filipic Source: Peggy Hall Recent interest in developing Ohio's resources for natural gas drilling has prompted Ohio State University's Agricultural and Resource Law Program to plan an Ohio Oil and Gas Law Symposium, "The 'New' Ohio Oil and Gas Boom: Drilling into Legal Issues." The Continuing Legal Education (CLE) program for attorneys will be held from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Thursday, June 16, at the Longaberger Golf Club at One Long Drive in Nashport, Ohio, 10 miles east of Newark. "Although Ohio has a long history of oil and gas production, we anticipate even greater interest in the legal issues involved as companies generate what may be unprecedented oil and gas activity in the Marcellus and Utica shale around the state," said Peggy Hall, director of the program and Ohio State University Extension agricultural law specialist. "Today's shale development uses new technologies and brings new legal issues that attorneys need to be aware of." The program offers 5.5 CLE credits. The registration fee is $175 by June 6 or $200 afterwards. Lawyers first admitted to the bar after 2008 receive a $50 discount. Lunch is provided. Registration by credit card is available at https://www.regonline.com/OilandGasLaw, or checks payable to the OSU Agricultural and Resource Law Program may be mailed with a completed form, available at http http://aede.osu.edu/programs/aglaw to Peggy Hall, Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, 2120 Fyffe Roa...
Read More »
No Comments
Legal Issues, May 2011, Upcoming Events
Share |
Apr
15
2011

State Hearing Officer Recommends Denying CAFO Permit Application for Hi-Q

In a case of first impression for Ohio, a hearing officer for the Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) is recommending that the ODA Director deny a CAFO permit application because it does not contain final recommendations on infrastructure improvements from county and township officials.  The recommendation came as a result of a hearing on Hi-Q’s permit application that took place last December, after ODA’s previous Director, Robert Boggs, notified Hi-Q of his intent to deny the application for failure to include the local governments’ recommendations on infrastructure.

The ODA hearing officer reviewed the notice of intended denial and Hi-Q’s permit application and agreed that the application was not complete.  Ohio’s Livestock Environmental Permitting Program requires Hi-Q to attach to its application for a permit to install and permit to operate a facility the ”written statements from the board of county commissioners of the county and the board of township trustees of the township in which the facility will be located, certifying that, in accordance with those sections, the applicant has provided the boards with the required written notification and that final recommendations, if any, regarding improvements and costs of improvements have been made by the boards.”  OAC 901:10-1-02(A)(6).  According to the hearing officer, Hi-Q’s application did not include the county and township recommendations.

Hi-...
Read More »

This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , , ,
Comments Off
April 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
Apr
14
2011

Update on Ohio Livestock Care Standards

Board nears completion of standards for farm animal care

The Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board accepted an enormous task nearly a year ago when charged with the responsibility of developing rules for the care and well-being of livestock in Ohio.  Since that time, the board has proposed numerous standards on topics ranging from euthanasia to housing.  To date, two sets of the board’s standards have completed the rulemaking process and are now effective.  Several others await either final approval by the board or review by the Ohio legislature’s Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review (JCARR).  The following summarizes the board’s progress.

1.  Livestock care standards developed by the board that became effective on January 20, 2011 include:

Euthanasia.  The standard outlines acceptable euthanasia methods for each species of livestock, and provides guidelines for use of each method of euthanasia.  See the final regulation in the Ohio Administrative Code, Section 901:12-1. Civil penalties.  The rule establishes penalties and a notification procedure for violations of the livestock care standards.  Violations rnage from minor–punishable by a penalty of up to $500 for a first offense and $1,000 for subsequent offenses within 60 months of the first–to major–punished by a civil penalty of $1,000 to $5,000 for a first offense, and $5,000 to $10,000 for each subsequent offense within 60 months of the first....
Read More »
This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , , ,
Comments Off
April 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
Mar
11
2011

Marcellus Shale in Ohio

Writer: Martha Filipic Phone: 614.292.9833 http://commtech.ag.ohio-state.edu Ohio landowners interested in leasing their land for natural-gas drilling into the rich resources of the Marcellus Shale need to be aware that such leases can carry some financial risk if they're not cautious. And, potential risks to the environment could be serious. The Marcellus Shale formation encompasses about 95,000 square miles from New York to West Virginia, swinging through the southeastern corner of Ohio. The ancient formation, lying 8,000 to 15,000 feet below the surface, is estimated to be capable of producing more than 363 trillion cubic feet of clean-burning natural gas -- more than 15 times the natural gas used in the United States each year. The Utica formation, which lies beneath the Marcellus and reaches into parts of central Ohio, appears to have similar reserves. These rich resources are fueling a "gas rush" in areas where drilling is taking place, but the rise of the new industry has also raised concerns about the possibility of water contamination. The drilling technology necessary to fracture the shale and release the gas requires millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals, some hazardous, to be injected into the wells, which sometimes extend horizontally for a mile underground from the well hole on the surface. Potential problems with the disposal and treatment of the liquid waste that results from these drilling practices has also raised questions. ...
Read More »
No Comments
Legal Issues, March 2011
Share |
Mar
11
2011

Important aspects of an oil & gas lease

By: Clif Little, OSU Extension Educator Oil and gas exploration may have great economic implications for landowners however; a good lease is not exclusively about money. A good lease is about maximizing economic gains, protecting the land resource and its usability. The terms of a lease like any business deal should be favorable to both parties. For each landowner there will be a different set of goals which influence the terms of a lease. List what is important to you and work with an attorney to incorporate your desires into the lease contract. This factsheet we will discuss how an oil and gas lease may impact landowners. Storage of gas, brine, oil and other materials Storage clauses or payment clauses may be utilized to keep a lease in effect regardless of whether oil or gas are found. A property owner should clearly understand all of the different ways their lease can stay in effect. If you do not intend for your property to become a storage unit for oil and gas produced elsewhere, make sure that this is clearly stated in the lease. It may be wise to work with your attorney to create a separate lease agreement for storage if that is your desire. Strata, pipelines There may be some advantages to the landowner in leasing to a drilling company only the formations that the company intends to develop. This may free the landowner to lease deeper or shallower formations to another company. In addition, leasing a specific formation to the drilling company...
Read More »
No Comments
Legal Issues, March 2011
Share |
Jan
24
2011

Ohio House introduces bill to repeal Ohio estate tax

A bill introduced in the Ohio House of Representatives proposes a complete repeal of the Ohio estate tax.  Representatives Grossman and Hottinger introduced H.B. 3 on January 11, 2011. The bill is simple:  it amends the estate tax provisions currently in Ohio law to state that the tax provisions apply only to estates of persons who died before January 1, 2011. Regardless of when the bill would become effective, persons dying after January 1, 2011 would not be subject to the estate tax. The bill also removes the estate tax return filing requirement for estates of persons dying after the January 1, 2011 date. 

The Ohio estate tax is a graduated tax on a person’s gross taxable estate, less deductions and exemptions.  An estate valued at less than $338,333 pays no tax due to credits and exemptions included in the law.  Estates between the value of $338,334 and $500,000 pay a 6% estate tax while estates over $500,000 in value owe a 7% estate tax.  The state receives 20% of the estate tax revenue and the local government of the decedent’s residence receives the remaining 80% of the tax.  Ohio is one of 17 states that have an estate tax.

How is agriculture affected by the Ohio estate tax?  It’s not uncommon for a farm estate to be valued at the taxable threshold of $338,334.  However, qualifying farm properties that elect the special use valuation option in the estate tax law can further reduce the taxable amount of the...
Read More »

This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags:
Comments Off
Legal Issues
Share |
Jan
07
2011

Ohio Governor Issues Emergency Rule on Ownership of Wild Animals

In an attempt to satisfy the animal welfare agreement negotiated last year with the Humane Society of the United States and various agricultural interests, Governor Strickland yesterday authorized an emergency rule that restricts the possession, sale and transfer of certain wild animals in Ohio.  The controversial animal welfare agreement, designed to prevent another Ohio ballot initiative on farm animal welfare,  provided that “[t]he Ohio Department of Agriculture and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources will coordinate and take action on wild and dangerous animals including the prohibition of the sale and/or possession of big cates, bears, primates, large constricting and venomous snakes and alligators and crocodiles.  Existing owners will be grandfathered in, but they could not breed or obtain new animals.”  The Governor’s action, however, is a week shy of the December 31, 2010 deadline included in the agreement, which stated that failure to implement the wild and dangerous animals provision by such date could void  the agreement. 

 ”This action fulfills my responsibilities within the agreement that will keep Ohio’s vital agriculture industry profitable while appropriately updating animal care standards,” said Governor Strickland.  The Governor also cited public safety reasons for the new regulation, stating that ”[t]his rule will help protect Ohioans from deaths and serious injuries caused by att...
Read More »

This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , ,
Comments Off
Legal Issues
Share |
Dec
27
2010

New Safety Rules for Private Intrastate Non-CDL Drivers

by Chris Zoller,Extension Educator, ANR, Tuscarawas County
The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) has revised its rules relative to motor carrier transportation safety. The new rules apply to businesses that use vehicles with a gross vehicle weight (GVW), gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), or gross combination weight rating (GCWR) of 10,001 to 26,000 pounds to transport property or passengers on a not-for-hire basis in Ohio. There have been several questions from farmers about how they will be impacted by these rule changes. The PUCO regulation change results in intrastate, non-CDL private motor carriers being subject to the same laws as other larger trucks. (Non-CDL is 10,000 - 26,000 lbs). However, these new rules will still not apply to farm trucks which remain in Ohio because the definition of private motor carrier, and for that matter motor transportation company, specifically does not include those trucks "engaged in the transportation of farm supplies to the farm or farm products from farm to market." So there is no change in compliance for farmers who are hauling supplies or products. The interpretation is that this is only for transport of your own farm products/supplies, not for-hire transportation or hauling. Here is a link to the two definitions: ORC 4921.02 See definition of "Motor Transportation Company": http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4921.02 ORC 4923.02 See definition of "Private Motor Carrier": http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4923.02 If you have any questions, I would encourage you to check the lin...
Read More »
No Comments
January 2011, Legal Issues
Share |
Oct
31
2010

Revisions Coming to the Ohio Agricultural Pollution Abatement Program?

Program revisions include new rules to address manure impacts on Ohio lakes

The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) will hold a public hearing next week for its proposed revisions to the Ohio Agricultural Pollution Abatement Program,  a water quality program that encourages voluntary actions to manage water pollution impacts from agricultural and silvicultural land uses, provides cost-sharing for agricultural pollution prevention, and allows ODNR to take measures against those who do not voluntarily address an agricultural pollution problem.  For purposes of the program, “agricultural pollution” is the failure to use appropriate practices in farming or silvicultural operations  to abate soil erosion or water quality impacts caused by animal waste or soil sediments.  Local Soil and Water Conservation Districts are initially responsible for implementing the program, with final oversight and enforcement authority held by ODNR’s Division of Soil and Water Resources.

The rule revisions come partially as a result of the agency’s mandatory five-year review of the program.   However, several new rules–undoubtedly the most controversial proposals–are in response to the high blue-green algae levels  in Grand Lake St. Mary’s and other Ohio lakes this past summer.  Studies indicate that manure is one of the contributors to the proliferation of the blue-green algae.  A plan of action to improv...
Read More »

This post is a reprint of a post by Peggy Hall that originally appeared at Ohio Agricultural Law Blog.
Tags: , , , , ,
Comments Off
Legal Issues
Share |
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Information presented above and where trade names are used, they are supplied with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by Ohio State University Extension is implied.

Ohio State University Extension embraces human diversity and is committed to ensuring that all research and related educational programs are available to clientele on a nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, disability, or veteran status. This statement is in accordance with United States Civil Rights Laws and the USDA.

Keith L. Smith, Ph.D., Associate Vice President for Agricultural Administration and Director, Ohio State University Extension TDD No. 800-589-8292 ( Ohio only) or 614-292-1868