Arbitration provisions continue to present issues and headaches for trial courts that are asked to enforce them. A recent case in point is
Booker v. Beauty Express Salons, Inc., 2018-Ohio-581 (Cuyahoga Cty.). There, plaintiff asserted various claims against her employer. The employer moved to stay the case and to compel arbitration pursuant to an arbitration agreement executed by plaintiff. Plaintiff challenged the enforceability on several grounds, including whether she actually signed the agreement and whether the agreement was valid or unconscionable. Eventually, she admitted to signing the agreement and, as a result, the trial court granted the motion to stay the case without a hearing, concluding that it had no jurisdiction to consider the validity or conscionability of the agreement. On appeal, plaintiff contended that a trial court must consider any challenges to the validity or conscionability of an arbitration provision if a plaintiff raises such challenges. The Eighth District agreed: “Prior to making any determination regarding the arbitrability of any issue, a court must first determine whether the arbitration agreement is enforceable under basic contract precepts.” Thus, trial courts are clearly obligated to consider arbitration agreements on two levels: (1) whether they are valid and enforceable under traditional contract law; and (2) whether the claims asserted fall within the scope of the arbitration clause.