Daniel E. Shuey
Practice Areas
Industries
Education
- Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., 2009, cum laude
Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, Senior Notes Editor - Muskingum College, B.A., 2006
Bar & Court Admissions
Judicial Clerkships
- Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer, Supreme Court of Ohio
Dan is a partner in the Vorys Columbus office, a member of the litigation group, and is co-chair of the firm’s appellate practice subgroup and of the firm’s agriculture industry subgroup. He is experienced in appellate, constitutional, eminent domain, real property, commercial, and oil and gas litigation. Dan also serves on the national counsel team for a Fortune 200 company in benzene and chemical litigation. He has helped Fortune 500 companies, public universities, private hospitals, small businesses, and family farms successfully resolve disputes through all stages of litigation. Dan also serves as an adjunct professor at Capital Law School, where he coaches a moot court team.
His notable experience includes:
- Successfully presenting oral argument in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of a bankruptcy trustee and defending against a petition of certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States
- Successfully presenting oral argument in Ohio appellate courts
- Drafting dozens of party, amicus, and jurisdictional briefs in Federal and Ohio appellate courts, including both the United States and Ohio Supreme Courts
- Litigating original actions and certified questions of state law in the Supreme Court of Ohio
- Protecting clients’ property rights and maximizing compensation in eminent domain actions against the State of Ohio and property disputes arising from rails-to-trails projects
- Obtaining on behalf of a family farm a federal court order invalidating Toledo’s Lake Erie Bill of Rights as unconstitutional on its face
- Obtaining a writ of mandamus against the Director of the Ohio Department of Transportation to vindicate a Wendy’s franchise’s constitutional right to just compensation
- Vindicating farmers’ First Amendment rights by pursuing Section 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim against the Director of an Ohio state agency
- Obtaining for a farmer a unanimous stay ruling from Supreme Court stopping a trial court judge from holding proceedings in violation of Ohio’s Eminent Domain statute
- Obtaining significant compensation from the State of Ohio for numerous farmer clients related to the State’s flooding of the client’s properties
- Obtaining writ of prohibition from Supreme Court of Ohio preventing the Ohio Oil and Gas Commission from exercising jurisdiction over the issuance of oil and gas permits
- Obtaining permanent injunction at trial on behalf of a city contractor regarding the award of a city contract
- Obtaining dismissal of a retaliation case brought by former professors against a university client under § 1983, the False Claims Act, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
- Obtaining dismissals of defamation, invasion of privacy, and related claims filed against national journalists and media organizations
Dan received his J.D. cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center where he was the senior notes editor for the Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics and represented clients as part of Georgetown’s Appellate Litigation Clinic. He received his B.A. summa cum laude from Muskingum College.
Dan served as a judicial law clerk for Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer of the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Professional and Community Activities
- • President of the Board of Trustees for the Ohioana Library Association, 2016-2020
- • Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, Member
- • Ohio State Bar Association Agricultural Law Committee, Member'
- • Leadership Columbus, Class of 2021
- • Leadership Westerville, Class of 2020
- • Leadership Board, Church of the Messiah, Westerville, Ohio
- • Alumni Interviewer for Georgetown University Law School
Teaching/Speaking Engagements
- • 2020 American Farm Bureau Conference, “How ‘Rights of Nature Laws’ Can Impact Your Farm and Future”
- • CLE Presentation “Identifying Final Appealable Orders”
- • 2006 Southern Political Science Association Conference, “Innovation or More of the Same: The Pre-Primary Campaign Fundraising Characteristics of Insider and Outsider Candidates in the 2004 Presidential Election”
News
- 1/28/2021The Ohio Supreme Court has sided with Washington County, Ohio landowners in an eminent domain case over a high-voltage transmission line. The landowners, represented by Vorys Partners Joe Miller, Tom Fusonie, John Kuhl and Dan Shuey, will now have their appeal, on whether the power company needs their land, heard in appeals court before any compensation-related trials for their property can begin.
- 1/1/2018Vorys is pleased to announce that Kelly Bissinger, Joseph Brunner, Laura Geyer, David Hine, Jacinto Núñez, Daniel Shuey and Keith Zabela became partners on January 1, 2018.
- 1/3/2011
Events
- 8/13/2020Vorys attorneys returned to host the Vorys On Call: Coronavirus webinar on Thursday, August 13, 2020.
- 3/26/2020Vorys attorneys representing various practice areas and disciplines came together to share their considerations as businesses navigate the COVID-19 pandemic during a webinar on March 26, 2020. This was the second webinar on this topic.
- 4/4/2013The Appellate Strategies and Perspectives CLE series was created to provide attorneys interested in appellate law with practical tips and tools, an analysis of emerging trends and issues in the field, and ajudicialviewpoint on the practice. The series, which was co-sponsored by Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP and The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, included three sessions in 2013, each following a similar format.
Insights
- 6/25/2021On June 23, 2021, the Supreme Court of the United States delivered a decision championing property rights that may have an impact on numerous fronts.
- 5/28/2021If your agricultural business operates a retail or wholesale website, you could be susceptible to the recent wave of “website accessibility” class action lawsuits being brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
- 5/14/2021Farmers are rapidly adopting precision farming techniques because they generate a treasure trove of valuable data to help guide farmers on how to optimize their farming.
- 4/6/2021On March 22, 2021 the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, a case that could have significant impacts in the areas of agricultural, eminent domain, and labor law. At issue is whether a state regulation that requires an owner to grant access to others over their private property some, but not all of the time, will always constitute a taking (in legal terms, is it a per se taking?).
- 3/16/2021On March 11, 2021, the Supreme Court of Ohio ordered the Department of Commerce and the Ohio Medical Marijuana Control Program (collectively the Department) to either approve or deny a Level II medical marijuana cultivator’s application to expand its marijuana-cultivation area. State ex rel. Fire Rock, Ltd. v. Ohio Department of Commerce, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-673.
- 3/11/2021On Wednesday, March 10th, the House passed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the third major federal COVID-19 relief act following the CARES Act and the December 2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act. President Biden is expected to sign it into law Friday.
- 12/27/2020Late on December 27, the President signed a $900 billion relief package that will provide aid to individuals and businesses still struggling with the economic impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Both the House and the Senate passed the proposal last week.
- 11/24/2020On November 20, 2020, the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second Appellate District, affirmed a judgment upholding a stop work order of a “Wedding Barn” on appellant’s property that appellant asserted had primarily been used for agriculture since 2003.
- 4/23/2020The new Presidential Proclamation does not apply to nonimmigrant temporary workers including agricultural workers who enter the U.S. on the H-2A Temporary Agricultural Worker Program.
- 4/23/2020Following weeks of negotiations, today Congress passed the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act providing a relief from the widespread economic injury caused by the COVID-19 public health emergency.
- 4/22/2020On April 21, 2020, the Ohio Supreme Court (the Court) ruled that the primary use of a barn, rented out for various social events, including weddings, was to facilitate the sale of wine cultivated and produced on the land.
- 4/8/2020Although geared primarily to non-federal governmental entities, the FEMA Public Assistance program also provides funding to eligible private non-profit organizations for "emergency protective measures" to respond to the COVID-19 emergency.
- 4/1/2020In addition to the CARES Act, a number of states have enacted legislation, implemented relief programs, or made available state resources to further assist businesses in combating mounting economic hardships. This alert summarizes the state-specific relief efforts in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington, D.C.
- 3/30/2020In response to the COVID-19 crisis, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed House Bill 197 into law on March 27, 2020, a bill that had passed unanimously in the Ohio General Assembly.
- 3/27/2020
- 3/26/2020Following days of often tense negotiations, the United States Senate has passed the third phase of federal coronavirus relief legislation, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act), which will provide $2 trillion in economic aid to individuals and businesses impacted by the coronavirus public health emergency.
- 2/17/2020The United States Supreme Court recently made clear that bankruptcy litigation is different than most civil litigation when it unanimously held that a bankruptcy court’s order denying relief from the automatic stay is a final appealable order.
- 11/6/2019On October 31, 2019, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) published in the Federal Register an interim final rule which – as required by last December’s Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (popularly known as the “2018 Farm Bill”)
- 3/7/2019The Sixth Circuit recently held that Baker Botts, L.L.P. v. ASARCO, L.L.C., 135 S. Ct. 2158 (2015) does not apply to contempt sanctions.
- 2/6/2019On February 4, 2019, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision upholding the constitutionality of Ohio’s statutory unitization procedures.
- 12/26/2018Every five years, Congress passes legislation that sets national agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and forestry policy. Significantly, the Farm Bill contains various provisions that will impact the agriculture industry.
- 11/27/2018Vorys attorneys Tom Fusonie, Dan Shuey and Andrew Guran co-authored an article for Farm and Dairy titled “Nuisance Lawsuits May Threaten Livestock Farmers.”
- 12/27/2017Tom Fusonie and Dan Shuey, attorneys in the Vorys Columbus office, co-authored an article for Franchising World titled “Four Questions to Consider When Construction Impacts Your Business.”
- 12/14/2017The ten-year anniversary of the last significant reform to Ohio’s eminent domain law presents an opportunity to revisit and reexamine the use of eminent domain law and its impact on Ohio’s farmers.
- 11/6/2017Flooding often is caused by natural disasters. But unfortunately, past flood events have also been caused or worsened by federal, state and local governments’ actions or inactions.
- 9/19/2016Earlier this month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit established a standard for application of Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) that significantly strengthens the bar imposed by the heightened pleading requirements of that rule.
- 6/16/2016On Thursday, June 16, 2016 the United States Supreme Court released its decision in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar (No. 15-7). In Escobar—argued on April 19, 2016—the Court decided the legal validity of the “implied certification” theory of liability under the False Claims Act (FCA).
- 4/22/2016On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. U.S. ex rel. Escobar.
- 8/12/2015On Tuesday, August 11, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit released a decision upholding an assertion of privilege by Kellogg Brown and Root, Inc. (KBR) over internal investigation documents in a FCA suit alleging kickbacks and overbilling on Iraq war subcontracts.
- 8/3/2015A decision last week in an FCA case in Pennsylvania confirms that the FCA’s first-to-file bar has been weakened. See U.S. ex rel. Boise v. Cephalon, Inc., No. 08-CV-287 (E.D. Pa.). The court in the Cephalon case confirmed that the Supreme Court’s decision in Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter means that the first-to-file bar does not apply when a previously filed case is no longer pending.
- 7/20/2015The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in U.S. ex rel. Hartpence v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. Lexis 11643 (9th. Cir. July 7, 2015), overruled existing Ninth Circuit precedent regarding the requirements for meeting the public disclosure rule’s original source exception, weakening the public disclosure bar in the Ninth Circuit and opening the door for increased qui tam activity within that jurisdiction.
- 5/26/2015Last month, the Sixth Circuit reaffirmed the fair market value (FMV) standard as the primary measure of damages in False Claims Act (FCA) cases—and demonstrated the teeth of that requirement when evidence (including expert testimony) is not presented to support an FMV determination. United States v. United Technologies Corp., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5476 (6th Cir. April 6, 2015), represented the culmination of a decades-long dispute between the government and United Technologies’ Pratt & Whitney unit over pricing for engines supplied to the Air Force for use in its F-15 and F-16 aircraft.
- 5/26/2015Today the Supreme Court issued its decision in Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter. On the first question presented, the Court held that the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA) applies only to criminal offenses and thus does not toll the False Claims Act’s (FCA) statute of limitations indefinitely while the United States is in armed conflict.
- 2/12/2015Courts continue to whittle away at the public disclosure bar, historically one of the best ways to dispose of parasitic qui tam lawsuits. Most recently, the Eleventh Circuit issued a ruling regarding the impact of the 2010 amendments to the False Claims Act’s (FCA) public disclosure rule. In its opinion in U.S. ex rel. Osheroff v. Humana, Inc., the Eleventh Circuitjoined the Fourth Circuit in holding that the public disclosure rule, as amended in 2010, is no longer a jurisdictional bar to an FCA action. Instead, under the amended version of the statute, defendants now must move to dismiss allegations that have been publicly disclosed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
- 2/5/2015A recent Sixth Circuit opinion provides defendants a valuable roadmap for using government witness testimony to defeat False Claims Act (FCA) claims on materiality grounds at the summary judgment stage. In U.S. ex rel. American Systems Consulting, Inc. v. ManTech Advanced Systems Int’l Inc., Case No. 14-3269 (6th Cir.), the court rejected the relator’s argument that materiality decisions should be left to a jury. Instead, the court expressly held that “a judge may decide as a matter of law whether a misrepresentation was material under the FCA.”
- 1/14/2015On January 8, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reinstated the government’s False Claims Act (FCA) claims in United States v. Triple Canopy, Inc., No. 13-2190. In reversing the district court’s dismissal of the government’s case, the Fourth Circuit highlighted, both explicitly and implicitly, the importance of the government’s decision to intervene in the case.
- 1/9/2015Earlier this week, Judge Amy Totenberg of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia imposed significant monetary sanctions against a pair of relators who blatantly and repeatedly violated the seal order in a pending qui tam action, United States ex rel. Bibby v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case No. 1:06-CV-0547-AT.
- 12/5/2014According to a recent Department of Justice press release regarding annual False Claims Act (FCA) recoveries, FCA recoveries continue to skyrocket, in keeping with the trend in recent years. 2014 marks the third straight year in which the Department of Justice has announced a record-setting annual recovery.
- 10/16/2014Last week, the District of Kansas granted summary judgment to Boeing in U.S. ex rel. Smith v. The Boeing Company, Case No. 05-10730MLB (D. Kan.), a False Claims Act case in which the qui tam relators effectively tried to second-guess the professional judgment of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
- 7/2/2014Last week, the D.C. Circuit provided good news to defense contractors, health care providers and all other corporate entities doing business with the government. In a forceful opinion, the court overruled a trial court decision that portended disastrous consequences for privileged internal investigations by corporate legal departments.
- 7/1/2014Today, the Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter. The petition presented two questions: (1) whether the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA) applies to claims of civil fraud brought by qui tam relators, and (2) whether the False Claims Act’s (FCA) first-to-file rule is an absolute bar or whether it permits subsequent actions so long as the first-filed action had been dismissed on non-merits grounds prior to filing of the subsequent action.
- 6/2/2014A recent decision dismissing a whistleblower’s complaint with prejudice is good news for companies facing a False Claims Act (FCA) case that turns on the interpretation of a regulation or contractual provision. In U.S. ex rel. Thompson v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., Case No. CV 12-2214-JAK (C.D. Cal.), the court articulated a clear and defendant-friendly formulation of the pleading standard for scienter in such cases.
- 3/27/2014A recent False Claims Act decision serves as an important reminder that although qui tam relators may “stand in the shoes” of the government for purposes of bringing a lawsuit, they are not entitled to substitute their judgment for that of key government decision-makers to avoid summary judgment.
- 2008