A Cuyahoga County, Ohio, court has reportedly determined that a state law
prohibiting municipalities from regulating the ingredients used in prepared
foods, such as restaurant meals and grocery or bakery takeout items, does
not preempt Cleveland’s ordinance prohibiting retail food establishments
from selling foods containing trans fats. Cleveland announced the ban in April
2011, and several months later, Ohio’s General Assembly amended the state’s
budget with a provision prohibiting municipalities from restricting the food at
food service establishments “based on the food nutrition information.”

Cleveland sued the legislature in January 2012, contending that it had encroached on its home rule authority. City of Cleveland v. Ohio, No. cv-12- 772529 (Ohio Ct. Com. Pl., Cuyahoga Cty., decided June 11, 2012). Additional information about the lawsuit appears in Issue 422 of this Update. The court apparently agreed, noting in the case docket that the amendment was unconstitutional and that the city’s enactment and enforcement of its ordinance “constitutes a proper exercise of the city’s home rule authority.” See The Wall Street Journal and Law360, June 13, 2012.

About The Author

For decades, manufacturers, distributors and retailers at every link in the food chain have come to Shook, Hardy & Bacon to partner with a legal team that understands the issues they face in today's evolving food production industry. Shook attorneys work with some of the world's largest food, beverage and agribusiness companies to establish preventative measures, conduct internal audits, develop public relations strategies, and advance tort reform initiatives.

Close