Mahoning Education Ass'n of Developmental Disabilities v. State Employment Relations Board, 998 N.E.2d 1124

SERB and MCBDD challenge R.C. 4117.11(B)(8)’s ten-day notice requirement as applied to informational picketing.
Union conducted informational picketing on November 5, 2007 outside MCBDD during negotiations for a successor contract, without notice to SERB or MCBDD.
Neither party had previously provided ten-day notice before the November 5, 2007 picketing.
SERB initially found probable cause and alleged an unfair-labor-practice; the trial court upheld SERB’s ruling, while the Seventh District reversed.
The Ohio Supreme Court ultimately held that R.C. 4117.11(B)(8) does not apply to informational picketing unrelated to a work stoppage.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether R.C. 4117.11(B)(8) violates the First Amendment on its face or as applied	Union: statute unconstitutional as content-based/ prior restraint	SERB: statute is constitutional, regulates conduct, not speech	Statute not applied to informational picketing; constitutional analysis not reached
Whether the notice requirement applies to informational picketing	Union argues notice applies to all picketing, including informational	SERB argues notice applies only to work-stoppage-related picketing	Notice does not apply to informational picketing in this case

State ex rel. Barley v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 132 Ohio St.3d 505 (2012-Ohio-3329) (statutory interpretation guidance on reading language in context)
Turner Broadcasting Sys., Inc. v. Fed. Communications Comm., 512 U.S. 622 (U.S. 1994) (content-neutral scrutiny framework for regulation of speech)
Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2009) (content distinctions in government-employer speech regulations)
State ex rel. Dickman v. Defenbacher, 164 Ohio St. 142 (1955) (presumption of constitutionality of statutes)
Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781 (U.S. 1989) (governmental regulation of speech must be narrowly tailored)