Publications & Media

The State of Ohio and its agencies, particularly the OSFC, continue to argue that contractors asserting claims have failed to provide sufficient notice and/or have failed to properly perfect their claims under the State’s “Article 8” claim process. Contractors continue to assert that the State waived these contractual requirements in one fashion or another.

In a decision dated May 9, 2012, the Court of Claims reduced the recovery of a contractor who has been litigating his claim since 2006 to $8,658.35. Stanley Miller v. OSFC, Case No. 2006-5632-PR. In an earlier trial decision the contractor recovered $404,276.93 (Stanley Miller I) but the Court of Appeals ruled that the contractor did not satisfy the Article 8 claims process. The Court of Appeals had remanded the case to the trial court a second time (Stanley Miller II) to determine if the Article 8 process had been waived.

While Stanley Miller involved a million-dollar claim asserted on a single piece of paper, contractors with viable claims are advised to attempt to comply with the State’s byzantine claims process, no matter how impractical or difficult.